ML19345E981

Evaluation of Irradiated Capsule W-225,Reactor Vessel Matls Irradiation Surveillance Program, Revision 1

ML19345E981
Person / Time
Site:	Fort Calhoun
Issue date:	08/28/1980
From:	Byrne S, Koziol J, Schoenbrunn A ABB COMBUSTION ENGINEERING NUCLEAR FUEL (FORMERLY
To:
Shared Package
ML19345E980	List: ML19345E979 ML19345E981
References
TR-O-MCM-001, TR-O-MCM-001-R1, TR-O-MCM-1, TR-O-MCM-1-R1, NUDOCS 8102060483
Download: ML19345E981 (115)

Text

'

O rn.o.ucwai Revision 1 Enclosure (1) to CE-18074-891 -

j t

OMAHA -

PUBLIC POWER DISTRICT  :

Fort Calhoun Station Unit no.1 evaluation irradiated capsule w-eas REACTOR VESSEL MATERIALS IRRADIATION SURVEILLANCE PROGRAM I

AUGUST 1980 l

l POWER h SYSTEMS COMBUSTIO 4 ENGINEERING. INC.

8102060k D

s TR-0-MCM-001 Revision 1 OMAHA PUBLIC POWER DISTRICT FORT CALHOUN STATION UNIT N0. 1 .

POST-IRRADIATION EVALUATION OF REACTOR VESSEL SURVEILLANCE CAPSULE W-225 August 1980 Oc n ,

6_c,w I fe /E/0 Prepared by: d / . /M- Date: /

S. ' 'yrn , Co ,i ant Enginear v Approvea by: , .

Date: 3 7, /fb y

J.J.froziol,P ~ gram M ager Approved by: Y. = - - - - Date: 8(/7M A. G. Scnoenorunn, Fort Calnoun Project F Assistant Project Manager QA Status: Ver: lied The safeh related design infar:n:t:en contamed in this document has been revie.ved and satisfies

(.shera ap;;!! cable) the items cootstret cs chsek.

hstic) 1 _,

= , anj - cf the Qu:.hty Ain:: ace at Dssign '. .tr..si. in s review is 50

~i i;e ic tcxncet etw.ar J.O$Nk Daa C- ^'T. B 14.fCb 3

\

Document Res. Ilo. A l

Combustion Engineering, Inc.

I Nuclear Power Systems l Windsor, Connecticut

s TABLE OF CONTENTS i Section Title Page No.

I Sumary 1 I

II Introduction 3 i III Surveillance Program Oescription 4 IV Capsule Withdrawal and Disassembly 16 V Test Results 18 l

VI Data Analysis 67 VII References 73 Appendix A Tensile Tests - Description and Equipment A-1 Appendix B Charpy Impact Tests - Description and Equipment B-1

]

l Apoendix C Instrumented Char;0MI-Notch Data . Analysis ~ C-1 4

1 i

i l

l l

l 11-

List of Tables Table No. Title Page No.

III-l Reactor Vessel Peltline Plates 5 III-2 Reactor Vesni Beltline Welds 6 III-3 Reactor Vessel Beltline Plates Chemical Analysis 7 III-4 Surveillance Plate and Weld Metal Chemical 8 Analysis III-5 Fort Calhoun Reactor Vessel Surveillance 14 Capsule Removal Schedule III-6 Type and Quantity of Specimens in 225' Capsule 15 IV-1 Mechanical Test Specimens Removed from 225* 17 Capsule V-1 Composition and Melting Points of Temperature 19 Monitor Materials V-2 Neutron Flux Monitors 21 V-3 Ft. Calhoun Iron Flux Attenuation Monitors, 26 Ccmpartment 2414 V-4 Ft. Calhoun Iron Flux Attenuation Monitors, 26 Compartment 2441 V-5 Ft. Calhota Iron Flux Attenuation Mcnitors, 27 Comps.ri. ment 247'e

V-6 ft. Calheur

lux Spectrum Monitors, Compartment 2 7. -

t 2414 V- 7 Ft. Calhoun Flux Spectrum Mon' tors, Compartment 28 2441 V-8 Ft. Calhoun Flux Spectrum Monitors, Compartment - 28 2473 V-9 Flux Monitor Activities 3I V-10 Fort Calhoun Fast Neutron Flux and Fluence Values 34 Iron Flux' Monitors 37 V-11 V-12 Charpy V-Notch Impact Results for Fort Calhoun 39 Standard Reference Material iii

= _ - _ _ - - _ _ _ _ _

List of Tables (Cont'd.)

Table No. Title Page No.

V-13 Post-Irradiation Tension Test Properties 44 V-14 Pre-Irradiation Tension Test Properties 45 V-15 Charpy Impact Results, Base Metal 46 V-16 Charpy Impact Results, Wald Metal 47 V-17 Charpy Impact Results, HAZ 48 Summary of Toughness Property Changes 71 VI-I C-1 Instrumented Charpy Test, Base Metal C-3 C-2 Instrumented Charpy Test, Weld Metal C-4 C-3 Instrumented Charpy Test, HAZ C-5 C-4 Instrumented Charpy Test, SRM C-6 C-5 Toughness Property Changes Based on C-7 Instrumented Charpy Impact Test iv

o List of Figures Fiqure No. Title Page No.

III-1 Surveillance Capsule Assembly 10 III-2 Charpy Impact Compartment Assembly 11 III-3 Tensile-Monitor Compartment Assembly 12 III-4 Location of Surveillance Capsule Assemblies 13 V-1 Efficiency Calibration 23

, V-2 Efficiency Calibration 24 V-3 ANISN Geometry 33 V-4 Iron Flux Wire Housing 36 V-5 Post-Irradiation Charpy Impact Properties, 41 Standard Reference Material V-6 Trend Curve Analysis, Standard Reference 42 Material Data, Comparison with HSST Data V-7 Stress-Strain Record, Base Metal, 72F 49

V-8 Stress-Strain Record, Base Metal, 250F 49 V-9 Stress-Strain Record, Base . Metal 550F 50 -

i V-10 Stress-Strain Record, Weld Metal, 72F 50 V-Il Stress-Strain Record, Weld Metal, 250F 51 V-12 Stress-Strain Record, Weld Metal, 550F 51 V-13 Stress-Strain Record, HAZ, Metal, 72F 52

! V-14 Stress-Strain Record, HAZ, Metal, 250F 52 V-15 Stress-Strain Record, HAZ, Metal, 550F 53-l V-16 Fracture Surface of Irradiated Tension 54 Specimens V-17 Charpy Impact Energy, Base Metal 55 V-18 Charpy Lateral Expansion, Base Metal 56 l v i

List of Figures (Cent'd.)

Fiqure No. Title Page No.

V-19 Charpy Shear Fracture, Base Metal 57 V-20 Charpy Inpact Energy, Weld Metal 58 V-21 Charpy Lateral Expansion, Weld Metal 59 i

V-22 Charpy Shear Fracture, Weld Metal 60 Charpy Impact Energy HAZ 61 V-23 Charpy lateral Expansion, HAZ 62 V-24 Charpy Shear Fracture, HAZ 63 V-25 Fracture Surfaces, Impact Specimens, 64 V-26 Base Metal Fracture Surfaces, Impact Spe:feens, c5 V-27 Weld Metal l

Fracture Surfaces, Impact Specimens, 66 i' V-28 HAZ predicted NOTT Shift for the Fort Calhoun 72 VI-1 Reacter Vessel 3eitline l.

l vi I

l l

i I

List of Figures (Cont'd.)

Figure No. Title page No.

A-1 Tensile Test System A-2 A-2 Typical Tensile Specimen A-3 A-3 Location of Tensile Specimens in Base A-4 Metal A-4 Location of Tensile Specimens in Weld A4 Metal A-5 Location of Tensile Specimens in HAZ A-6 B-1 Charpy Impact Test System B-4 B-2 Typical Charpy V-Notch Inpact Specimen B-5 B-3 Location of Charpy Specimens in Base Metal B-6 B-4 Location of Charpy Specimens in Weld Metal B-7 B'- 5 Location of Charpy Specimens in HAZ B-8 C-1 ICV Load vs. Temperature Curves, Base Metal C-B C-2 ICV Load vs. Temperature Curves, Weld Metal C-9 C-3 ICV Load vs. Temperature Curves, HAZ C-10 C-4 ICV Load vs. Temperature Curves, SR5 C-ll 1,

i I

l

'vii I'

I i _ u . ~ . _. . _ . . _ .._. .. . . _ . , ._ _ _ _

SUMMARY

The first surveillance wall capsule (W-225) was removed from the Fort Calhoun reactor vessel in October 1977 after 2.6 effective full power years of reactor operation. The surveillance test specimens and monitors were evaluated at C-E's Windsor, Connecticut i

laboratory facility.

Post-irradiation evaluation of the temperature monitors indicated that the irradiation temperature was between 536 F and 558 F.

Analysis of the neutron threshold detectors provided a capsule fluence of 5.1 x 10 18 n/cm2 (E>l MeV), which corresponded to a maximum fluence at tne inside surface of the reactor vessel of 3..t x 10 I8 n/cm .

Radiation induced changes in the tensile &nd impact properties were determined for the base metal (longitudinal orientaticn), ,

weld metal and heat-affected zone surveillance materials.

Transition temperature shifts ranged from 60*F for the base metal to 238'F for the weld metal. The upper shelf impact energy after irradiation was in excess of 50 ft-lb for each of the surveillance materials, ranging from 119 ft-ib for the base metal to 64 ft-lb for the weld metal. The measured shift and percent decrease in shelf energy were in agreement with the predictions based on l

Regulatory Guide 1.99, Revision 1. The weld metal exhibited the l greatest toughness property change consistent with having the l highest residual copper content (0.35 w/o). The post-irradiation tensile properties exhibited the same general trends as the j toughness properties; the yield strength of the weld metal increased l 35% versus 14 to 18% for the base metal and HAZ, respectively.

l Ductility changes with irradiation were generally of a smaller magnitude such that the ductility was sustained near the pre-irradiation levels. For example, total elonaation for the weld metal ranged from 20 to 23% after ir' radiation as compared to 22 to 28% before irradiation.

l 1

l

Future projections of transition temperature shift for the Fort Calhoun reactor vessel beltline materials will be based on the Guidelines of Regulatory Guide 1.99, Revision 1.

I l

l l

2

II. Introduction The purpose of the Fort Calhoun surveillance program is to monitor the radiation induced changes in the mechanical properties of ferritic materials in the reactor vessel beltline during the operating lifetime of the reactor vessel. The surveillance program includes the determination of the preirradiation (baseline)

strength and toughness properties and periodic determinations of 1

the property changes following neutron irradiation. These property changes are used to verify and update the operating limits (heat-up and cool down pressure / temperature limit curves) for the primary system.

The Fort Calhoun Surveillance program (I) is based upon ASTM E185-66, " Recommended Practice for Surveillance Tests on Structural Materials in fluclear Reactors". The pre-irradiation (baseline) evaluation results from the Fort Calhcun reactor vessel surveillance materials are described in C-E report TR-0-MCD-001.I2) The following report describes the results obtained from evaluation of irradiated materials from capsule W-225 which was removed from the reactor in October 1977.

b

~.

3

III Surveillance Procram Description The Fort Calhoun reactor pressure vessel was designed and fabricated by Combustion Engineering, Inc. The reactor vessel beltline, as defined oy 10CFR50, Appendix H, consists of the six plates used to fom the lower and intemediate shell courses in the vessel, the included longitudinal seam welds and the lower to intemediate shell girth seam weld. The plates were manufactured from SA533 Grade B Class 1 quenched and tempered plate. The heat treatment consisted of austenization at 1575 + 25F for four hours, water quenching and temoering at 1225125F for four hours. The ASME Code qualification test plates were stress relieved at 1150 1 25F for forty hours, and furnace cooled to 600F. The longitudinal and girth seam welds were fabricated using E8018-C3 manual are electrodes and Mil B-4 submerged arc weld wire with Linde 124 and Linde 1092 flux. The post weld heat treatment consisted of a twelve hour 1150 + 25F stress relief heat treatment followed by furnace cooUng to 600F. The beltline raterialsI3) are identified in Tables III-l and III-2. The chemical analysis ( } of the six seitline plates is given in Table III-3. The materials included in the surveillance program were selected to represent the beltline materials from the reactor vessel. The base metal surveillance material, plate 0-4802-2, was' selected from the six beltline plates on the basis of the highest initial drop weight NDTT. The heat treatment of the surveillance plate duplicated that of the reactor vessel ASME Code qualification test plates. The surveillance weld material was fabricated by welding plate D-4802-1 to olate 0-4802-3 using the same weld procedure used for the intemediate to lower shell girth seam weld. The same type of filler wire and flux was used. The post-weld heat treatment consisted of a forty hour stress relief at 1125 + 25F followed by furnace cooling to 600F. The surveillance heat-affected zone material was fabricated by welding plate 0-4802-2 to plate D-4802-3 in the same manner as the surveillance weld material with the same postweld heat treatment.

The chemical analysis of the surveillance plate and weld ( } is given in Table III-4.

4 1

TABLE III-l REACTOR VESSEL BELTLINE PLATES Location Piece Number Code Numcer Heat Number Suoplier Intemediate 436-029 D-4802-1 C-2585-3 Lukens Shell Intemediate 436-02A 0-4802-2 A-1768-1 Lukens Shell Intermediate 436-02C D-4802-3 A-1768-2 Lukens Shell Lower Shell 436-038 D-4812-1 C-3213-2 Lukens Lower Shell 436-03A D-4812-2 C-3143-2 Lukens Lower Shell 436-03C D-4812-3 C-3143-3 Lukens

)

5

TABLE III-2 REACTOR VESSEL BELTLINE WELDS Location Weld Seam No. Wire Heat No. Flux Type Flux Batch Intermediate 2-410A 51989 Linde 124 3687 Shell Longi-tudinal Seam Intemediate 2-4108 M/A JBFG* -

Shell Longi-tudinal Seam Intermediate 2-410C 51989 Linde 124 3687 Shell Longi-tudinal Seam Lower Shell 3-410A 12008 Lince 1092 3774 Longitudinal 13252 Linde 1092 3774-Seam 27204 Linde 1092 3774 Lower Shell 3-410B M/A E0AG* -

Longitudinal Seam Lower Shell 3-410C 12008 Linde.1092 3774 Longitudinal 13252 Linde 1092 3774 Seam- 27204 Linde 1092 3774 Intermediate 9-410 20291 Linde 1092 3833-to Lower Girth Seam

• Manual shielded metal arc electrode (all others automatic submerged arc wire).

6 l

TABLE III-3 REACTOR VESSEL BELTLINE PLATES CHEMICAL ANALYSIS Element D-4802-1 0-4802-2 0-4802-3 0-4812-1 D-4812-2 .0-4812-3 Si .23 .23 .24 .24 .26 .25 S .015 .014 .012 .012 , .013 .011 P .011 .009 .009 .009 .010 .010  :

Mn 1.27 1.43 1.50 1.31 1.33 1.30 C .21 .22 .29 .22 .26 .22 Cr .08 .04 .05 .18 .06 .06 Ni .56 .48 .51 .60 .56 .56 Mo .'9 .50 .53 .54 .52 .51 V <.001 <.001 .002 .002 .002 .002 Cb <.01 <.01 <.01 <.01 <.01 <.01 B .0004 .0003 .0004 .0006 .0006 .0002 Co .007 .007 . .008 .009 .007 .007 Cu .12 .10 .11 .12 .10 .10-Al .020 .030 .024 .029 .038 .027 W .02 .02 .02 .02 .02 .01 Ti <.01 <.01 <.01 <.01 <.01 <.01 As < . 01 ' <. 01 <.01 <.01 <.01 4.01 Sn .002 .002 .002 .002 .001 .001 Zr .002 .002 .002 .002 '02

, .002 N .009 .009 .010 .007' .008 .007 2

i 7

TABLE III-4 ,

SURVEILLANCE PLATE AND WELD METAL CHEMICAL ANALYSIS Weight Percent Plate Weld Element 0-4802-2 D-4802-1/D-4802-3 Si .23 .14 5 .014 .011 P .009 .013 Mn 1.43 1.57 C .22 .14 Cr .04 .03 Ni .48 .60 Mo .50 .50 V <.001 .002

. Cb <.01 <.01 B .0003 .0002 Co .007 .014 -

Cu .10 .35 Al .030 .G09 W .02 .02 Ti <.01 <.01 As <.01 <.01-Sn .002 .007 Zr .002 .002 N .009 .012 2

i i

8 e

Drop weight, Charpy impact and tension test specimens were machined from the surveillance materials as described in reference 1. In addition to the surveillance material specimens, Charpy impact specimens were machined from a section of plate 0 from the Heavy Section Steel Technology (HSST) program to serve as standard ro 'erence material (SRM).

The surveillance and SRM test specimens were enclosed in six capsules for irradiation in the Fort Calhoun reactor vessel. The surveillance capsule assembly is shown in Figure III-1. Each assembly consists of four compartments containing Charpy impact specimens (Figure III-2) and three compartments (Figure III-3) containing tensile specimens and monitors (flux and temperature).

Each capsule is positioned in a holder tube attached to the reactor vessel cladding to irradiate the specimens in an environment which duplicates as closely as possible that experienced by the reactor vessel. Capsule locations are shown in Figure III-4 The axial portion of each capsule is bisected by the midplane of the core. The circumferential locations were selected to coincide with the peak flux regions of the reactor vessel.

The withdrawal schedule for the surveillance capsules is given in Table III-5. It was based on the requirements of 10CFR50, Appendix H, " Reactor Vessel Material Surveillance Program Requirements,"

and an estimated end-of-life adjusted reference temperature in excess of 200F.

The type and quantity of test specimens contained in the 225' capsule are given Table III-6.

!e Lock Assembly

> Wedge Coupling Assembly

[ > Extension Assembly x;

Tensile -Monitor- -

Compartment s, -

> Charpy Impact Compartments

'7 Tensile-Monitor -

Compartment N s-

$ s s

I

\sh s > Charpy impact Compartments

%s

\

s-Tensile -Monitor Compartment  ;,

OMAHA Fi g u r e

""A' Z' "" L*I"'"

, . ,. SURVEILLANCE CAPSULE ASSEMBLY 10 III-I Unit No.1

4 hl

-Wedge Coupling - End Cap l

Charpy impact Specimens s

Spacer \s s s

N,/

N, -

)

0 C

~o2' Enlarged Plan View Elevat. ion View l Ac 1

i

TABLE III-5 FORT CALHOUN REACTOR VESSEL SURVEILLANCE CAPSULE REMOVAL SCHEDULE Removal Refueling Capsule Removed Sequence Schedule EFPY* Preferred Al ternate 1 2.6 ~225' 85, 95 or 275' 2 10 45' 265*

3 17 85, 95, 275 or.225" 4 24 85, 95, 275 or 225' 5 Standby Any of remaining capsules 6 Standby Any of remaining capsules

• EFPY - Effective full power years 14 a

i  !

i i

i j

TABLE III-6 TYPE AND QUANTITY OF SPECIMENS IN 225 CAPSULE Material Charpy Impact Tensile I

Base Metal 12 3 (longitudinal)

S Weld Metal 12 3

Heat-Affected Zone 12 3 i Standard Reference 12 -

! Material I

Total 4 9 i

r s

1 r

4 3

1 I

s i

i

. 15 i

f j

r w ,>-p.--w.-9,wi--,w.ew,ww.,mycm, 9 y e w r . , ,, .g,,, ,v r, , .m., ,.--,,-,,,wy, r.,g-~e,,-,we g.r,, .,,.ye,..,,,,, ,.,,& 4 y,.r.c.,_.,-- ,grv,,'-.-.,-

.y., .. --

,-w-r

IV. CAPSULE WITHDRAWAL AND DISASSEMBLY The Fort Calhoun 225 surveillance capsule was removed frem the reactor vessel during the October 1977 refueling outage (September 30, 1977, shutdown). Removal was accomplished by attaching a special tool to the capsule lock assembly to disengage the latches and withdraw the capsule. The five remaining capsules were inspected using an under-water video system. The inspection.

revealed that the capsules were securely locked in position. The 225* capsule was transferred to the spent fuel ocol where it was sectioned into lengths for insertior into a shipping cask.

Sectioning was accomplished by drilling to separate the wedge assembly halves, leaving the specimen ccmpartments intact.

The surveillance capsule was shipped to Neutron products, Inc. in Dickerson, Maryland, for inspection, disassembly and specimen removal in the hot cell facility. No unusual features or damage were revealed by visual inspection. A remote control circular saw was used to open the capsule compartments. Each compartment was identified and inspected prior to cutting, and the contents were removed and verified against the original leading records.

An inventory of the mechanical test specimens' removed frcm the 225* capsule is given in Table IV-1.

l E

l i

(

i t

l l

TABLE IV-1 MECHANICAL TEST SPECIMENS REMOVED FROM 225* CAPSULE Material and Compartment Number Specimen Type Specimen Identification 2414 HAZ Tensile 4EC, 402, 4EK 2424 HAZ Charpy 463, 45L, 45U 42B, 420, 452 418, 43P, 42Y 461, 41Y, 446 2435 SRM Charpy 55H, 55Y , 575 573, 55P, 563 56J, 55T, 56A 566, 56D, 565 4-2441 Base Metal Tencile 100, 101, lEL 2451 Base Metal Charpy 14T, 144, ISD l 167, 13C, 13D 15C, 12A, 13B 112, 117, 14M 2463 Weld Metal Charpy 341, 32J, 32E 31E, 317, 318 32U, 336, 337 352, 312, 310 1

t 2473 Weld Metal Tensile 3ES, 3EC, 3ET l

l l

t I

! 17 i

i i

V. TEST RESULTS A. Irradiation Environment

1. Temoerature Monitors Each Tensile-Monitor Compartment (Figures III-l and III-3) in tne Capsule assembly contained a set of four temperature monitors to provide an indication of the maximum temperature in the capsule during irradiation. The composition and melting point of each eutectic alloy monitor is given in Table V-1. Each monitor consisted of a helix of the eutectic alloy and a stainless steel weight encapsulated in a quart:

tube. Each set of four temperature monitors was inserted into a stainless steel housing, and the temperature monitors were irradiated in the top, middle and bottom surveillance capsule compartments.

Post-irradiation examination of the temperature monitors was performed in the hot cell. Once the nonitor housing was extracted frem the capsule compartment, eacn terrperature monitor was identified by length. Each nonitor was inspected to detemine whether the eutectic alloy helix had been crushed by the weight. Only the 80". Au-20% Sn alloy melted, indicating that the capsule temperature exceeded 536'F, but was less than 558'F (the next higher monitor melting point).

The same behavior was exhibited by_ each of the three sets of monitors, indicating a relatively uniform maximum temperature l profile along the length of the surveillance capsule.

2. Neutron Dosimetry Each Tensile-Monitor compartment (Figures III-l and III-3) in the capsule assembly contained one set of neutron flux 18 l

_ . . . . _ . . _ . . - _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ . ~ . _ _ _ _ . . . . _ . _ _

i i ,

r TABLE V-1  ;

{ COMPOSITION AND MELTING POINTS i 0F TEMPERATURE MONITOR MATERIALS i

Composition Melting Temperature (Weight ".) *F 80 Au, 20 Sn 536 ,

I 90 Pb , - 5 Sn , sag 558 97.5 Po, 2.5 Ag 580.

4 97.5 Pb, 0.75 Sn,1.75 Ag 590 t

}

i l' +

l i

I-P i

19

monitors and one set of flux attenuation monitors. The flux monitors are described in Table V-2. Each flux monitor was encapsulated in a stainless steel sheath (except for the sulfur which had a quartz sheath); in addition, cadmium covers were placed around the uranium, nickel and copper monitors which have competing thermal activities. Each set of seven flux monitors was inserted into a stainless steel housing, one set for each of the top, middle and bottom surveillance capsule compartments.

The flux attenuation monitors are composed of five iron wires encapsulated in a stainless steel sheath and positioned at three different distances from *.he core within a stainless steel housing. One set of flux attenuation monitors was inserted in each of the tcp, middle and bottem capsule compartments.

The flux monitnrs were removed from the capsule compartments in the hot cell. Each mon' tor was inspected and its position in the housing verified by t.1e number of grooves in the stainless steel sheath. The monitors were tr.en repackaged and shipped to C-E's Windsor, Connecticut facility for radiochemical analysis.

a. Radiochemical Analysis Radiochemical analysis of the flux monitors was perfccmed in accordance with C-E Procedure 00000-FMD-401, Rev. O, November 1,-1978 (" Standard Method for the Analysis of Radioisotopes in Reactor Irradiation Surveillance Detectors and Flux Distribution Monitors"). Each Monitor was removed from its sheath and inserted in a glass vial. Recovery of the uranium, titanium and cadmium shielded monitors was complicated by oxidation and contamination of the moniters.

20

-- .= . . _ . - . - _ - - .

I TABLE V-2 NEUTRON FLUX MONITORS 4

Material Reaction Threshold Energy (Mev) ilalf-Life i

Uranium U238(n,f) CsI37 0.7 30.2 years Titanium Ti46(n.p) Sc46 8.0 84 days.

Iron Fe54(n.p) Mn54 4.0 314 days Uranium U238(n,f) Cs137 0.7 30.2 years (Cadmium Shielded) i Nickel NiS8(n,p) CoS8 5.0 71 days (Cadmium Shielded)-

Copper Cu63(n,a) Cc60 7.0 - 5.3 years (Cadmium Shielded) '

Sulfur S32(n p) P32 2.9 14.3 days i

i s

e j

21-

The uranium foil had converted to a black powder, assumed to be U 0 . Therefore, instead of using a simple gravimetric 38 measurement, the amount of uranium recovered was determined by atomic absorption spectroscopy. The titanium wires were found broken into several pieces, but otherwise they presented no handling or counting problems. The cadmium shield on the copper and nickel wires had apparently melted and fused to the wire during irradiation. The cadmium shields were mechanically removed by stripping, scraping and filing.

Final monitor weights were based on elemental analysis using atomic absorption spectroscopy. The remainder of the samples for radiochemical analysis were prepared using standard methods.

Counting was performed with a 4096 channel gamma soectrometer system coupled with a lithium-drifted germanium detector.

The system was calibrated at 0.5 Kev per channel to span the gamma energy range from 0.05 to 2 Mev. Efficiency calibration was performed using eight (8) gamma energies emitted from an NBS traceable mixed isotope standard. Detector efficiency curves were determined by a least squares analysis of eight (3) plotted efficiency points. Detector efficiency curves used in the surveillance capsule analysis are given in Figures V-1 and V-2.

Sulfur monitors could not be analyzed due to the complete decay of phosphorous-32 during the elapsed time from end of irradiation to analysis.

Physical constants used in the calculation of radioisotope activity levels are as follows:

Isotooe Half-Life Gamma Eneray (Mev) Intensity Cobalt-58 71.3 days 0.810 0.9944 l

Cobalt-60 5.26 years 1.173 0.9988 Cesium-137 30.0 years 0.662 0.846 Manganese-Sa' 314 days 0.835 1.000 Scandium 83.8 days 0.889 1.000 r

22 l

l

6 g g i j g i l i [ t l -

5 -

LEVEL 2 4 - TIME T O144000 MIN -

COUNTING TIME 2000 SEC 3 -

LOG (EFFICIENCY)=A0+A3 x LOG (ENERGY)

AO- 2.780E 00

~

A 3 9.67EE41 STD ERRCR OF EST 1.897E 02 8

X

• 1 -

3 O .9 -

g . -

2 .7 -

.6 -

.5 -

.4 -

.3 -

.2 -

.1 I I I I  ! III V I I I I I

.2 .3 .4 .5 .6.7.8.91 2 3 4 5 6 7 ENERGY,MEV FIGURE V 1 EFFICIENCY CAL 13 RATION LEVEL 2 23 1

6 ' I I I i i i i i I I I Il 5 ~

LEVEL 3 4 ~x TIME TO 119520 MIN COUNTING TIME 3000 SEC 3 -

LOG (EFFICIENCY)=Ao + A1 x LOG (ENERGY) 2 -

AO 3.201E 00 _

A1 9.481E 01 e STD ERROR OF EST 2.121E 02 3

1 ._

x .9 3

o .3 - .J 57 -

56 -

q g.5 __ -.

l 4 - -.

I

.. ~ -

.2 -

1  !  ! I I I i i !! l  ; i , ,

.2 .3 4 .5.6.7.8.91 2 3 4 5 6 7 l

ENERGY,MEV f

FIGURE V.2 EFFICIENCY CAllBRATION LEVEL 3 l

I 21 L

Results for the iron flux attenuation monitors 'are listed in Tables V-3 through V-5. Flux spectrum monitor activity levels are presented in Tables V-6 through V-8. All values are decay corrected to the time of reactor shutdown, 0948, September 30, 1977. The uncertair.ty listed with each result is the 2-sigma counting error only. An additional error of l 120% for uranium monitors and 15% for all other monitors is estimated from volumetric / gravimetric operations and from the certified uncertainties of calibration isotopes.

The shutdown activities detennined from gamma ray emission rates were calculated as follows:

?

A=

EWBC (exp-\t) where: A = shutdown activity in disintegrations per minute par milligram of material (dpm/mg)

Np = radioisotope net counts per minute E = full . energy peak effiency (counts per gamma ray emitted)

W = weight of monitor sample (milligrams)

B = ' radioisotope ganna ray branching ratio (gamma rays per disintegration)

C = correction for coincident or random summing A = radioisotope decay constant i t = elapsed time between plant shutdown and counting t'

25

TABLE V-3 FT. CALHOUN IRON FLUX ATTENUATION MONITORS COMPARTMENT 2414 Counting Monitor Number of Weight Decay Interval Measured Activity at End Material Grooves (mo) (Days) (Seconds) Isotope Irradiation (Opm/ma) 5 Iron 1 26.0 479.02 2000 54 Mn 1.629 + 0.013 x 10 5

Iron 2 26.4 479.02 2000 54 Mn 1 518 + 0.013 x 10 5

Iron 3 26.3 479.15 2000 54 Mn 1.645 + 0.013 x 10 5

Iron 4 26.1 479.17 2000 54 Mn 1.788 + 0.013 x 10 5

Iron 5 26.4 479.20 2000 .54 Mn 1.531 + 0.012 x 10 TABLE V-4 FT. CALHOUN FLUX ATTENUATION MONITORS COMPARTMENT 2441 Counting Monitor Number of Weight -Decay Interval Measured Acti"ity at End Material Grooves (mg) (Days) (Seconds) Isotoce Irradiation (Dom /mg) 5 Iron 1 26.8 479.22 2000 54 Mn 1.590 + 0.013 x 10 5

Iron 2 26.2 479.93 2000 54 Mn 1.625 + 0.013 x 10 5

Iron 3 26.0 479.96 2000_ 54 Mn 1.605 0.013 x 10 5

Iron 4 26.5 479.99- 2000 SA Mn 1.722 + 0.013 x 10 5

Iron 5 26.0 480.02 2000- 54 Mn 1.497 + 0.012 x 10 26

TABLE V-5 FT. CALHOUN FLUX ATTENUATION MONITORS COMPARTMENT 2473 Counting Monitor Number of Weight Decay Interval Measured Activity at End hb terial Grooves (mg) (Days) (Seconds) Isotope Irradiation (Dom /mg) 5 Iron 1 26.4 476.09 2000 54 Mn 1.524 1 0.012 x 10 5

Iron 2 26.5 476.15 2000 54 Mn 1.554 1 0.012 x 10 5

Iron 3 26.1 476.17 2000 54 Mn 1.519 1 0.012'x 10 5

Iron 4 26.4 476.19 2000 54 MP 1.636 1 0.012 x 10 5

Iron 5 26.3 476.22 2000 54 Mn 1.384 1 0.011 x 10 TABLE V-6 FT. CALHOUN FLUX SPECTRUM MONITORS COMPARTMENT 2414 Counting Monitor Number of Weight Decay Interval Measured Activity at SJ

!!aterial Grooves (mg) (Days) (Seconds) Isotoce Irradiation (Dom / mci Uranium 1 24.00 475.96 -3000 137 Cs 5.90 1 0.05 x 10 Titanium 2 8.1 483.02 4000 46 Sc 5.51 1 0.70 x 10' 5

Iron 3 26.6 472.98 2000 54 Mn 1.598 i 0.019 x 10 4

! e ded) 5 16.85 475.21 3000 137 Cs 1.76 1 0.04 x 10 ~

l Nickel 6 (Shielded) 6 23.6 474.94- 2000 58 Co 3.303 1 0.050 x 10 Copper 3 (Shielded) 7 29.9 47_4.17 3000 60 Co 6.55~1 0.22 x 10 l

I ,

(

27 L

4 TABLE V-7 FT. CALHOUN FLUX SPECTRUM MONITORS COMPARTMENT 2441 Counting Monitor Number of Weight Decay Interval Measured Activity at End Material Grooves (mo) (Days) (Seconds) Isotope Irradiation (Opm/mg) 4 Uranium 1 25.33 475.92 3000 137 Cs 4.94 + 0.05 x 10 4

Titanium 2 14.1 475.10 4000 46 Sc 5.38 + 0.50 x 10 5

Iron 3 26.6 474.23 2000 54 Mn 1.648 0.019 x 10 Uranium 4 (Shielded) 5 7.33 475.26 3000 137 Cs 1.72 + 0.05 x 10 Nickel 6

• (Shielded) 6 21.9 474.97 2000 58 Co 3.364 2 0.053 x 10 Copper 3 (Shielded) 7 27.3 474.14 3000 60 Co 6.65 + 0.23 x 10 TABLE V-8 FT. CALHOUN FLUX SPECTRUM MONITORS CCMPARTMENT 2473 Counting Monitor Number of Weight Decay Interval Measured Activity at End Material Grooves (mo) (Days) (Seconds) Isotooe Irradiation (Dom /mg) 4 Uranium 1 30.08 476.00 3000 137 Cs 3.73 + 0.04 x 10 4

Titanium 2 14.5- 475.17 4000 46 Sc 5.47 3 0.53 x 10

' 5 Iron 3 26.1 474.26 2000 54 Mn '1.542 2 0.013 x 10 Uranium 2 (Shielded) 5 14.50 475.88 3000 137 Cs 1.45 0.04 x 10 Nickel 6 (Shielded) 6 23.0 475.00 2000 58 Co 3.052 + 0.049 x 10 Copper 3 (Shielded) 7 25.0 474.06 3000 60 Co 6.27 + 0.23 x 10 28

b. Threshold Detector Analysis The SAND-III4)andANISNI } computer codas'were used to calculate the fast flux and fluence at the surveillance capsule assembly location and at the reactor vessel.

The SAND-II54) computer code is used to calculate a neutron flux spectrum from the measured activities of the flux monitors. SAP .1 requires an initial flux spectrum estimate; this is calce sted using ANISN.(5) The measured activities must be ad):;sted before they can be put into SAND. The various !teps of the procedure are described below.

The measured activities were decay corrected to reactor shutdown.

The foils irradiated and the shutdown activities are shown in Tctle V-9. Before being used by SAND, the foil activities must be converted to saturated activity with units of disinte-grations per second per target atom (dps/a). The following equation was used for the conversion:

= M A 16.67 A

sat 3g3 ,

where A = Saturated activity -(dps/a) sat M = Measured activity at shutdown (dpm/cg)

A ~~

Atomic weight N = ' Avogadro's number I = Isotopic abundance .of target isotope S = Saturation factor, explained below 238 fission product. activities, the required SAND' input-For U has dimensions of fissions per.second per U 238 atom (fps /a).

l 29

This is obtained by dividing A sat by the fractional fission yield of the fission product whose activity was measured.

The saturation factor, S, converts the measured activity to a saturated activity. The actual reactor operating history was used to calculate the saturation factor. The reactor was assumed to operate for several periods of constant power. Then, for each isotope, S was calculated.

S = r h exp (-\ T9 ) [1 - exp (-A tj )]

1 where Pi = Power of ith interval Po = Full Power A = isotooe' decay constant T4 = Time between end of ith operating period to reactor shutdown l t g = length of ith operating period The saturated activities are given in Table V-9.

The uranium foil is shielded with cadmium to prevent thermal fissioning in any U-235 impurities. However, the cadmium I cover does not prevent fast fissioning in U-235. Therefore, I an unshielded uranium foil is included in the flux monitor

! set. The activity of the unshielded foil can be used to determine the amount of fissioning in the shielded uranium foil caused by U-235. As a result of this calculation, the U-238 fission rate was detemined to be 75", of the shielded l

uranium foil activity in Table V-9.

l SAND requires an -initial estimate of the neutron flux spectrum.

This initial estimate was calculated using ANISN, a one-dimensional discrete ordinate code. 'The DLC-23 CASK, 22 l

30

. = _. -

TABLE V-9 FLUX MONITOR ACTIVITIES Monitor Material Measured Isotone 1 Uranium Cs 137 i

2 Titanium Sc 46 3 Iron Mn 54 4 Uranium (shielded) Cs 137 4 5 Nickel (shielded) Co 58 6 Copper (shielded) Co 60 Shutdown Saturated Compartment Monitor Activity (dem/mo) . Activity (dos /a)b 2414 1 5.90(+4)a 1.10(-13) 2 5.51(+4) 1.08(-15) 3 1.598(+5) 6.02(-15) 4 1.76(+4) 3.29(-14) 5 3.303(+6) 9.08(-15) 6 6.55(+3) 6.36(-17) 2441 1 4.94(+4) 9.24(-14) 2 5.38(+4) 1.05(-15) 3 1.698(+5) 6.21(-15) 4- 1.72(+4) 3.22(-14) 5 3.364(+6) 9.25(-15) 6 6.65(+3) 6.45(-17) 2473 1 3.73(+4) 5.97(-14) 2 5.47(+4) 1.07(-15) i 3 1.542(+5) 5.81(-15) 4 1.45(+4) 2.71(-14) 5 3.052(+6) 8.39(-15) 6 6.27(+3) 6 09(-17)

a. Denotes power of 10 f

b. Uranium Foils are (fps /a) l 31 l

I

group neutron cross section library was used. The reactor geometry is shown in Figure V-3 (as-built dimensions).

SAND uses an iterative technique to calculate the neutron flux spectrum. The activities of the set of flux monitors and an initial flux spectrum are the input required by SAND.

Activities are calculated for each foil for the flux spectrum using the following equation A=I c(E )D(E4

)aE j 4 i

where a(E4 ) is reaction cross section at energy E g, barns.

. 0(E$ ) is the flux at E ,j n/cm'-s,mev aE j is width of energy band at E j, mev.

The flux spectrum is adjusted by an iterative technique until the calculated and measured activities agree. The result of this is a 620 group neutron flux.

The flux and fluence results are shown in Table V-10. From the ANISN case, the flux at the clad-v'essel interface and at 1/4 of the vessel thickness was determined to be 0.67 and 0.4T times the flux at the surveillance capsu'- These factors were used to calculate the flux and fluence at the vessel clad interface and 1/4 the thickness into the vessel.

Taking factors from the one-dimensional- ANISN is appropriate since the 225' surveillance assembly is at the azimuthal location of the maximum vessel flux. The fluences have beM extrapolated to end of cycle five and end of life.

Reference 3 states that the SAND code will give fluxes that are accurate to within t 10% to 130% if the errors in the measured activities are within similar limits. From Tables 32

FIGURE V-3 ANISN Geometry 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Region i

Inside -

l Region Name Material Radius (cm)

I 1 Core Homogenized core 100.0 2 Shroud Stainless steel 141.0 3 Coolant Water 142.6 4 Core Support Barrel Stainless steel 153.2 5 Coolant Water 157.0 6 Themal Shield Stainless steel 161.3 7 Coolant Water 168.9 8 Vessel Carbon steel 179.7 Inlet Water temperature 528 F i

{

l i

! 33 e

--m-- g - - w y- e - ,g -n - --w - e , + . ~ u

TABLE V-10 FORT CALHOUN FAST NEUTRON FLUX AND FLUENCE VALUES Fast Flux (E>1.0 Mev) 2 location Maximum Flux (n/cm .3)

Surveillance Capsule 6.3(+10)a ,

Vessel-clad interface 4.2(+10) 1/4 thickness of vessel 2.6(+10) 1 Fast Fluences (E>1.0 MeV) c d Location End of Cycle 3 b End of Cycle S End of Life Surveillance Capsule 5.l(+18) 8.5(+18) 6.3(+19)

Vessel-clad interface 3.4(+18) 5.6(+18) 4.2(+19) 1/4 thickness of vessel 2.l(+18) 3.5(+18) 2.6(+19)

a. Denotes power of 10

b. 2.6 effective full power years (EFPY), full power is assumed to be 1420 mwt

c. 4.3 EFPY (estimated)

d. 32.0 EFPY D

.34

V-3 through V-8, the 2-sigma uncertainties in the measured activities were less than 112t. Therefore, it is estimated that the uncertainty in the measured flux at the surveillance capsule location is about 120% to 130%. The extrapolated Flux in the vessel will be slightly higher, so a reasonable value to use for the vessel uncertainty is 130%.

The maximum flux in the Fort Calhoun reactor vessel is 4.2 x 0 2 10 n/cm -s, resulting in an end of life fluence of 4.2 x 9 2 10 n/cm . This assumes a 40 year life with an 80%

capacity factor.* The maximum fluence at the end of cycle five operation is 5.6 x 10 18 n/cm . The maximum fast flux at the 225' surveillance capsule assembly location is 6.3 x 10 2 10 n/cm -s. These values are a factor of 2.10 higher than the original design estimates (eg, 4.2 x 10 I9 n/cm2 end-of-life fluence versus the design estinate of 2.0 x 10 l9 n/cm2 ),

c. Flux Attenuation Monitor Analysis Each of the three tensile monitor cocpartments centained a set of five iron flux attenuation monitors as shown in Figure V-4. Three iron wires (1 thrcugh 3) were located equidistant from the core; the remaining two wires (4 and 5) were located 0.162 inches either side of the radial midolane of the monitor block. The measured activity and calculated i

flux for each wire is given in Table V-ll. The neutron flux for each wire was calculated using the spectrum averaged cross section determined for the iron threshold detectors (previous section) using the follcwing relationship:

A e=g where o is the spectrum averaged cross section (b)

A is the saturated activity (dos /atem) 0 is the fast flux (n/cm -s E>lMev).

• Based on 1420 mwt -full power rating.

35

\

l

- 0.638 --.

= ~ '

0.319 O.162 -

: 0.162 1

- FE WIRE NUMBER O

.L - 0.162 1

0.394 0.394 t 1.387 4

I y _

0.162

, 1 0.035 x 45 CHAM TYP No. 50 (0.0700) DRILL 1150 MIN INCLUDED ANGLE 5 HOLES h Fe FLUX HOUSING ALL DIMENSIONS IN INCHES FIGURE V-4 IRON FLUX WIRE HOUSING 36

TABLE V-ll ,

IRON FLUX MONITORS l

Saturated Comoartment 3 (b)

Number of Activity (dos /a) 9 p ("mc 2 ,3 )(}

Grooves __

4

-15 6.46+10(1) 2414 .095 1 6.138 2 6.097-15 6.42+10

-15 3 6.198 6.52+10 4 6.737-15 7.09+10 5 5.769-15 6.07+10 2441 .101 1 6.014-15 5.95+10 2 6.123-15 6.06+10 3 6.048-15 5.99+10 4 6.488-15 6.42+10

+10 l 5 5.641-15 5.59

+10 2473 .116 1 5.742-15 4.95 2 5.855-15 5.05+10 3 5.724-15 4.93+10 4 6.164-15 5.31+10 5 5.215-15 4.50+10 j (1) Denotes power of ten (2) O pis flux greater than 1 Mev.

l i te.

4

'37

1 The fast flux in the iron flux monitors is then just the saturated activity divided by the average cross section. The average cross section in each compartment is given in Table V-11.

In any compartment, the spread in activities of wires 1, 2, and 3 is about 2".. This fact supports an assumption made in analyzing the threshold monitors, that they all were exposed to about the same flux spectrum.

The calculated fast flux for wires 1 through 3 is consistent with the values obtained for the iron threshold detectors in each compartment. Fast flux values for the wires closer to the core (Number 4) were 6.6 to 9.6% greater than the flux at the midsection, and wires away from the core (number 5) ,

were 6.2 to 9.6% less than the flux at the midsection. This it dicated that the flux gradient through the test specimens was approximately 15%.

d. Standard Reference Material (SRM) Analysis Charpy impact specimens from a standard reference material (Heavy Section Steel Technology Prcgram, HSST Plate 01) were irradiated along with the reactor vessel surveillance materials in the 225' capsule. The SRM specimens were included to augment the dosimetry analysis through correlation with results from experimental data and other surveillance program data on the same material.

The Charpy impact test results from the irradiated SRM specimens are given in Table V-12; the impact energy data are plotted as a function of test temperature in Figure V-5.

Also shown in Figure V-5 is an average curve for unirradiated material *. The radiation induced shift in the SRM transition temperature measured at the 30f t-lb energy level is 124*F.

• SRM specimens were not tested as part of the Fort Calho'u'n baseline evaluation.

The unirradiated transition curve in Figure V-5 was based on test results on the same material (HSST Plate 01) from other sources. (6-8) 38

l.

TABLE V-12 CHARPY V-NOTCH IMPACT RESULTS FOR FORT CALHOUN STANDARD REFERENCE MATERIAL Specimen Test Impact lateral Fracture Identification Temperature Energy Expansion Appearance Number ('F) (ft.lb) (mils) (% Shear) 55T 80 9 7 0 573 120 17 19 0 566 120 22 21 0 55M 160 38 24 20 55Y 160 38 33 20 56J 200 50 38 30 563 200 63 47 30 565 250 84 70 80 i 75 50 70 56A 250 560 300 92 75 90 575 350 102 80 100 55P 350 107 83 100 39

Available irradiation data (6-16) for HSST plates 01 and 02 are shown in Figure V-6. The HSST data include specimens from the quarter thickness of the plates oriented in both the longitudinal (RW) and transverse (WR) direction. The data represent both experimental and power reactor irradiation exposures. Also shown in Figure V-6 is the neutron fluence (including the + 30% uncertainty band) obtained from analysis of the flux mcaitors nearest to the capsule compartment in which the SRM specimens were irradiated. The upper bound of the HSST plate irradiation data is seen to intersect the upper 18 2 bound fluence estimate (7.0 x 10 n/cm ) at the 124*F shif t measured from the Fort Calhoun SRM data. The range of fluence inferred from the HSST plate trend band is 0.7 to 1.6 x 10 I9 n/cm for the 124*F SRM shift.

2 The SRM irradiation data confirm that the Fort Calhoun 225' capsule exposure was well in excess of the original target fluence of 1.8 x 10 18 n/cm . The infomation presented in 2

18 2 Figure V-6 confirms that the actual exposure was 5.1 x 10 n/cm or higher, thereby supporting the results from the neutron flux monitor analysis. A more explicit detemination of fluence from the SRM data is not practical because of possible differences in materials and radiation environment (dose rate and flux spectrum) between the Fort Calhoun reactor vessel and the data used to evaluate the SRM data in Figure V-6.

s 40

I I I I I I

_ g O

_ _ R n

_ g N

2 O o E w

- g -

e 2

w o

o z

w

- 0 0 -

R =

s

• C w ui c:

c 3 ~-

O -

8 & I

%C2 a f <

2 G w

- O -

R 0

- m -

w c:

r wG u., O

" c:

1

- 0 -

8 -

es a 2 <

S M  !

z

= z

$"o - e

• o

~

a" ,I H

• 4 C" C we <

r .

=

<m o 5 5b

<D A

c: m a m

== 2 O T e 5

m

=

3 I I I I I I i

e s"

e e e o e o e o N C 2 @ T N 3

871d ' AD83N310VdWI 41

M H

S N S U) R OF l

O l 4 T l2 I A1 N O

C (0 M T3 1 Ry X4 Oo U4

~ Ft L2 _ .

FT RN g OE %

)

FM 0 A

. E T3 ,

T C R 1 A N PA 2 D E

UMM L

LO/ C A i

F C N H N F1T8 0 E

T O T 0 1 A

l i

1 l 0 TM x ,

1 M UO 4 )

E ER V C NF 5

(

E N

' M E j 1 R M > E u .'.

F E E t ,

4 j

i T

/ 2

. l f

MC MD U

1 EP C l l

/

i S T

N A C D ( D E E E NA A P T ,

C AT T S A N IA S D A N L E D O UC I

0 U S T L

I

_ SS

_ N S S

L F YS

. O2 I A ,

N Ll l I

0 F C Al

_ T E O i A T l NT D A 3O i

I T AI A L U E W P E VN

_ R N H 8 l

l O I

0 1 uS l E 1 l 0 Ct l i

T 0 0 ,

1 DA NP A

L E T EM A AA P iO l

. T L ,

TC SS P

l l

6 -

V E

l l

U G

I

_ _ - . - ~

- - . F 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 0 5 1 1 2

- [o F E g z g

B. Strength and Toughness Properties

1. Tension Tests Tension tests were conducted in accordance with applicable ASTM standards und C-E laboratory procedures. The test method and equipment are described in Appendix A.

The three irradiated specimens from each material (base metal, weld metal and heat-affected zone) were tested at room temperature, 250*F and 550F. The tensile properties are listed in Table V-13, and the stress-strain curves are shown in Figure V-7 through V-15. The pre-irradiation tensile properties (2) are sumarized in Table V-14 (each value average of three tests). photographs of the fracture surface of the broken irradiated specimens are shown in Figure V-16.

2. Charcy V-Notch Imoact Tests Charpy V-notch impact tests were conducted in accordance with apolicable ASTM standards and CE laboratory procedures.

The test method and equipment are described in Appendix B.

Twelve irradiated specimens from each material (base metal, weld metal and heat-affected zone) were tested at a series of temperatures to establish the transition temperature behavior. The impact data (impact energy, lateral expansion and fracture appearance as a function of test temperature) l are shown in Tables V-15 through V-17 and Figures V-17 l

through V-25. (Also shown in each of the figures is the unirradiated transition temperature curve from the baseline evaluation.(2)) Fracture surface photographs of the broken irradiated specimens are shown in Figures V-26 through V-28.

Each impact test was instrumented. Additional- data related I

to instrumented impact testing are presented in Appendix C.

l 43 l

TABLE V-13 POST-IRRADIATION TENSION TEST PR0pERTIES FORT CALHOUN SURVEILLANCE MATERIALS Yield Ultimate Elon9ation Test Strength Tensile Fracture Fractu Reduction (1-inch ga9e)

Specimen Temp. Upper / Lower Strength load Fracture Strength (a) Stress [g) of Area TE/UE Material Code M (ksi) (ksi) _ _(16)_ (ksi) (ksi) (%) (t) __

Base Metal 101 72 79.0/78.2 100.4 3030 61.7 194 68.2 27/10.3 lEL 250 72.7/72.1 91.2 3080 62.7 182 65.5 24/(c) 100 550 65.2/62.7 89.3 3030 61.7 169 63.5 (c)/6.7 Weld Metal 3ET 72 105.7/101.0 114.6 3630 73.5 190 61.7 22/8.8 g' 3E5 250 93.5/92.3 104.4 3010 60.9 160 61.9 23/8.5 3EC 550 91.7/86.2 103.2 3870 78.3 171 54.2 20/(c)

IIAZ 402 72 78.3/74.4 96.7 3060 61.9 194 68.0 21/5.9 4EK 250 72.9/70.6 88.8 3670 74.3 149 50.2 13/5.1 4EC 550 61.9/59.5 86.5 3000 60.7 164 62.9 18/5.5 a - Fracture stren9th is the fracture load divided by initial cross sectional area b - Fracture stress is the fracture load divided by final cross sectional area c - Not detennined

TABLE V-14 PRE-IRRADIATION TENSION TEST PROPERTIES FORT Call 10VN SURVEILLANCE MATERIALS Yield Ultimate Elon9ation Test Strength Tensile Fracture Fracture Fractu Reduction (1-inch gage)

Temp. Upper / Lower Strength Load Strength (,) Stress [g) of Area TE/UE Material ( F) (ksi) (ksi) (1b) (ksi) (ksi) (%) (%)

Base Metal 71 70.8/66.8 89.2 2740 55.9 187 70.1 28/10.9 250 64.5/62.7 83.0 2580 52.7 190 72.1 26/9.9 550 56.9/55.1 85.6 2780 56.7 178 68.0 24/10.3 g- Weld Metal 71 78.0/74.1 90.2 2760 56.3 188 70.1 28/10.2 250 72.1/69.0 83.1 2600 53.1 177 70.1 24/8.4 550 65.9/64.1 85.2 2980 60.8 163 62.6 22/9.2 IIAZ 71 66.7/63.0 85.1 2840 58.0 168 65.5 24/10.0 250 60.0/58.5 79.8 2730 56.7 155 63.3 20/8.1 550 53.6/52.3 81.8 2980 60.4 160 62.4 21/8.7 a - Fracture strength is the Fracture Load divided by initial cross sectional area.

b - Fracture stress is the Fracture Load divided try final cross sectional area.

1 TABLE V-15 CHARPY V-NOTCH IMPACT RESULTS FOR FORT CALHOUN IRRADIATED BASE METAL (LONGITUDINAL)

(PLATE D-4802-2)

Specimen Test Impact. Lateral Fracture Identification Temperature Energy Expansion Appearance

^

Number (*F) (Ft-lbs.) (mils) (* Shear) 14M 40 14.0 16.0 10 167 40 15.5 17.0 10

117 75 25.0 24.0 20 12A 80 33.0 32.0 10 112 120 62.0 53.0 40

, 13B 120 64.0 47.0 40 13C 160 80.0 67.0 60 14T 160 83.0 70.0 70 130 200 92.0 70.0 80 144 200 119.0 84.0 100 15C 250 122.0 86.0 100 150 250 126.0 82.0 100 5

i 46

2 TABLE V-16 CHARPY V-NOTCH IMPACT RESULTS FOR FORT CALHOUN IRRAOIATED WELD METAL Specimen Test Impact lateral Fracture Identification Temperature Energy Expansion Appearance '

Numbe- (*F) (Ft-lbs.) (mils) (% Shear) 352 80 15.0 13.0 0 33T 120 20.0 21.0 0 318 120 23.0 22.0 0 32E. 160 19.0 20.0 10 31C 160 29.0 29.0 30 336 200 34.0 33.0 40 320 250 41.0 40.0 60 ,

341 250 46.0 44.0 70 312 300 62.0 53.0 90 32J 350 64.0 51.0 100 317 350 65.0 50.0 100 31E 400 66.0 - 62.0 100 47

TABLE V-17 CHARPY V-NOTCH IMPACT RESULTS FOR FORT CALHOUN IRRADIATED HAZ METAL (BASE METAL PLATE D-4802-2)

Specimen Test Impact Lateral Fracture Identification Temperature Energy Expansion Appearance Number ('F) (Ft-lbs.) (mils) (% Shear) 45L 0 17.0 16.0 0 45U 40 27.0 25.0 20 42U 40 50.0 50.0 30 464 80 40.0 36.0 20 42Y 80 53.0 46.0 30 452 120 40.0 42.0 30 43P 120 90.0 73.0 40 463 160 55.0 , 53.0 30 41B 200 72.0 57.0 80 428 250 93.0 79.0 100 41Y 300 88.0 62.0 100 446 300 112.0 79.0 100 e.

48

1 l i l l l l 1 i i l I i l l 100,000 _

k 80,000 _

=

60,000, _ -

40,000 j 0 I l l l l  ! l l l l l l 1 l

0 0.04 0.08 0.12 0.16 0.20 0.24 0.28 STR AIN, IN/IN FIGURE V 7: STRESS-STRAIN RECORD OF TENSILE TEST, BASE METAL PLATE D 4802 2, SPECIMEN No.101, TEST TEMPERATURE 720F 120,000 j l l l j l l l l l l l l 100,000 _ EXTENSOMETER ARMS SLIPPED -.

80,000 - -

2 _

'N~% ,

8 '~ s a ss 5 60,000. -

o 40,000! -

~

~

0 1 I I I I I I I I I i I i I

0 0.04 0.08 0.12 0.16 0.20 0.24 0.23 STR AIN, IN/IN s

FIGURE V 8: STRESS STRAIN RECORD OF TENSILE TEST BASE METAL PLATE D-4802 2 SPECIMEN No. IEL, TEST TEMPERATUR E 2500F 19

120,000 j l j j j i i i l i i i i l

100,000 -

05

'.8 80,000 _

E a

60,000 .

40,000 -

%: ~_

l l l l l l l l I 0 l l l l l O 0.04 0.08 0.12 0.16 0.20 0.24 0.28 STRAIN, IN/IN FIGURE V 9: STRESS STR AIN RECORD OF TENSILE TEST, SASE METAL PLATE D 4802 2, SPECIMEN No.*DU, TEST TEMPERATURE 5500F 120,000 g  ; , , , g g , g g g g

}

100,000 .

@ 80,000 .

tl E

$ 60,000 .

l 40,000 !

A-0 l 1 I i l I I l l l l l l l O 0.04 0.08 0,12 0.16 0.20 0.24 0.28 STR AIN, IN/IN FIGURE V 10: CTRESS STRAIN RECORD OF TENSILE TEST,' WELD METAL PLATE D-4802-1,3, SPECIMEN No. 3ET, TEST TEMPERATURE 720F 50

120,000 l I i I i i i l I i i l i i 100,000 -

G l o.

y 80,000 ,

w 6

m 60,000 -

40,000 -

0 l l 1 I I l l l l l I l l l 0 0.04 0.08 0.12 0.16 0.20 0.24 0.28 STRAIN, IN/IN FIGURE V 11: STRESS STRAIN RECORD OF TENSILE TEST. WELD METAL PLATE D-48021,3, SPECIMEN No. 3ES, TEST TEMPERATURE 2500 F 120,000 l l l I l l l l l l l 1 l l EXTENSOMETER ARMS SLIPPED 100,000 - ,

'w E 80,000 . s'N s _

N e

M 60,000 <_ _

40,000 -

=

0 l l l l l l l l l I I I i l j

0 0.04 0.08 0.12 0.16 0.20 0.24 0.28 STRAIN, IN/IN FIGURE V 12: STRESS STRAIN R'ECORD OF TENSILE TEST, WELD METAL PLATE D-4802-1,3, SPECIMEN No. 3EC, TEST TEMPERATURE 5500 F l

51

1 l l l l l l l l l l l l l l 100,000 -

E 80,000 . _

8 w

z '

g 60,000 _

40,000 _

Z  %

0 l l l l l l l l l l l l l l 0 0.0 % 0.08 0.12 0.16 0.20 0.24 0.28 STRAIN, IN/IN FIGURE V 13: STRESS STRAIN RECORD OF TENSILE TEST, H.A.Z.

METAL PLATE D.4802 2,3, SPECIMEN No. 402, TEST TEMPERATURE 720F

20,000 i i i i l I i l I l i l i i 100,000 -

E ,

80,000 _

a a

c H

• M.000 40,000 _

~.

~!

I l l l l l l l 1 I I O I I I O 0.04 0.08 0.12 0.16 0.20 0.24 0.28 STRAIN, IN/IN FIGURE V.14: STRESS STRAIN RECORD OF TENSILE TEST, H.A.Z.

METAL PLATE D-4802 2.3, SPECIMEN No. 4EK, TEST TEMPERATURE 2500 F 52

, , - - - -- -- .. .- __= - - . - . . . - - , . - -. . . - - . _ . . - . -

120,000  ; g ( l l l l 1 i i i i i i 100,000 - -

E 80,000 ._

vi

$ l

=

$ 60,000 1 40,000 -

25  ::

o I I I l I I I I I I I I I.I o 0.04 0.08 0.12 0.16 0.20 0.24 0.28 STRAIN, IN/IN FIGURE V 15: STR ESS STR AIN RECORD OF TENSILE TEST, H.A.Z.

METAL PLATE D-4802 2,3 SPECIMEN No. 4EC, TEST TEMPERATURE 5500 F

\

t l

53 l

l i

I l

FIGURE V-16 FRACTURE SURFACE OF IRRADIATED TENSION SPECIMENS, FORT CALHOUN l

SURVEILLANCE PROGRAM f

I Base Metal l

ug

, +

l Specimen No: 101 lEL IJJ l 550*F

! Test Temp.: 72 F 250'F ,

i

'feld Metal Specimen No: 3ET 3E5 3EC Test Temp.: 72*F 250 F 550 F i

Heat-Affected Zone

.4

.i u .. --

.n 4EK 4EC Specimen No: 4D2 1

Test Temp.: 72'F 250 F 550 F

.d c 54

l l l I l l l e

~

m e

en N

g N

I G e o o -

8 e

- g - 8 -

- m

_=

• N.

O

. N e o e a

-R s8

- o i W -

< w

= >

w  ? <

e C

o -8 5 t w w i

1 * <

l w H w a w e w g O w I a

=

0

- g e =

w n

' Z w

N "

O u E 5 -? -

f

= c :s

=

z =  :

C = =

e o 8 @

c

- 7

- - M >

T w

=

3 C

I I I I I I I e e

I o e e o e e

o e e n

c -

e e

N

- .e o r SO 13 'AD83N3

I 0

i 2 3

I 0 I 8 2

0 I

I 4 2

I h0 I I

0 0

2 0

)

W l

l

(

I . 6 2 1 -

2 0

F 8

" 4 -

E D I e I 0 2

1 l

l U T E

T A A L l

l P E L P

I I

0 ME A

- 8 T E

F T M 0 I E

6 S S E

I 0 T Al I

- 4 i N

1 D

/ I 0 O

I S

N A

P X

E E T D L A

I E A D T l A 0 l 1 A I 4- E l

i D 1 HI A A l L N l l

Y U i l

P R

l 9 O 40 8 A l

i C

0 8 I 2 1 1

l V

E l

ul

- - 0 G

- - _ - - 6 1

I F

0 0 0 '0 0 0 0 o 6 4 2 0 8 6 4 2 1 1 1 1 s

3_2,Z8 a 45l5 -

3

100 g g g y y g y g SQG g 8 UNiflllADIATED 80 - O litllADIATED O -

O

<,, g 60 -

O -

se q Uh

40 - _

e 20 -

o _

0 l l l l l l l 1

-160 -120 -80 -40 0 40 80 120 160 200 240 280 320 TEST TEMPEf tATullE,F FIGullE V 19 CilAllPY SilEAll Flt ACTullE BASE METAL PLATE D 4802-2 (ilW)

0 e 0

_ - - _ O- _ - 4 I

0 I 6 3

I I 0 2

3 I

0 I 8 2

I 0

I 4

2 0

I O= I 0

2 F E

R U

0 T I

e e oO I 6

1 A I

I E

P M

E

'l

• 1 0 2 T 1 T F S E L 8 T b A 2 T 0 E 1

e r a

l 8 M 3 D 2 L E

W 0 Y l

• l 4 G l

D l E

E T D N A E E I

T

• T D A e l 0 C l

A I A

l l D I' l

ii A M N H l

I U i Y l

P l g O ee l 0 4- R A

l i

C 0

l g T 80 -

2 -

V E

R U

_ - - - - _ - 0 G 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 I2 D 1

- F I

6 4 2 0 8 6 4 2 3 1 1 1 m3i 3$E m

e o i I I I 9 l l  ?

o g

O a

n

- _ E N

- _ S N

- g? N a

C 9e oo - 8"

-y

=

2 a ie c -

3 !"- ;5 m

NE

+ 2

u. 8 N

8 $

z 9

c w w z Q S e -

a 2 n x C 4 w

< - a c: C 4 3 5 =

z  ::: e - o w H

D  := <

r e o 5 c.

ee - o y G

- g - g N w

C

' D I I I I I I I I

• e N e W

1 "

l C o o o o o o o o 3  % D C 2 C

• N l

( S1tW 'NOISNVdX3 7VB31V7 l

l 59

O y  ? ,

100 , , , , , y , , ,

4 UNIRRADIATED 80 -

O IRRADIATED O

e m 60 - O -

<t a

s LR 40 -

4 e

O 20 -

O O I l l l 6 I i i _1 1 I

-120 -80 -40 0 30 80 120 160 200 240 280 320 360 400 TEST TEMPEllATUllE,0F FIGURE V-22 CilARPY SHEAR FRACTURE WELD METAL O

O O 0

i l 8 2

0 I l 4 2

)

I e O l 0

0 2

2 2

0 8

4 D

0 E I g O I 6 T 1

A L

P L

0 A I

O e o I 2 1

T E

M E

S A

B l

8 o: o I 0 F 8

(

E E N l

l O U Z T D l

e O 8 I 0 A 4 l l

E T

- E C

. P E F

/

M F E F 1

1 T A l

e e O 1 0 I S

T A

E E F T l l

w 4 Y 0

1 G I

e l 0 4 - E l

l D N E E T D A

I E T C

D T A g 0 A I

A I I

8 P

l l D -

M l

i A I i l Y N f t P U i l l

. 0 l

A I

9 O I 2

1 l

i C

e 3 0 2 -

I 6 V 1

E l

l

_ u G

I

. - - _ _ - - _ 0 0 F

- 2

_ 0 0 0 o 0 0 0 8 -

6 4 2 0 s 6 4 2

' 1 1 1 a$+u. >g28u

_ o_ O- _ _

I 0 I

8 2

o I 0

4 I 2

)

2 -

2 0

8 0 4 I . g I 0

2 D E

T A

L 0 P I ee I 6

1 L

A T

E M

0 E I e e O I 2

1 F

S A

B

", (

o E R N E

0 U O I e O I 8 T Z A D H E E T y 0 E P

M E C

F I e O O I 4 T F T

S A -

E T

T A

El F l 0

I ee 4 1

1 I

N O

I S

N A

P e g I 0 4 X I - E

_ D l

- E A T D R A E E I

I D

A T

A I

ee I 0 8 -

T A

L l

f D l

A Y f

i l P N

U i

H I

e 0 R

A

_ i 2 l

_ I 3 O 1 i

C e 4 2 -

0 V 6

I 1 E

l l

U G

I

_ 0 F

_ - - _ 0 2

0 0 0 0 -

0 0 0 6 4 2 4 2 0 0 1 1 1 JH

" hazfx3gg$

0

,r0 i i i i i i i i . i 4 UNIHHADIATED G

80 - O IHRADIATED g g e _

cc 60 -

b 5

i: a e 40 - ,

e o _

O O O O e

20 -

O ,

e 0

• i 1 I I I ' ' I ' '

, O

-160 -120 -80 -40 0 40 80 120 160 200 240 280 320 T EST 'l EMPEll ATURE, F FIGURE V-25 CilARPY SilEAR FilACTUllE IIEAI-AFFECTED ZONE (BASE METAL PLATE D 4802 2)

1 I

i

)

j Figure V-26 FRACTURE SURFACES OF FORT CALHOUN i CHARPY V-fl0TCH IMPACT TEST SPECIMENS BASE METAL (LONGITUDINAL)

I ^

l

.g . " <.- 'g. 7,, '. . y :__ ~ q , , ' f 77 ~Q l 'n- Yf .,' +gi 3 ; '.'i.. ~.n... ( f 9.' ~~. ,.-E . ', -. ]!

1?-q .

4 j ;~. . k Wy J.d 4 f ,'g .

ln*f ( .$f;d!.'['g g;,$' : f-M ir . ~

~gl,A: .t.p., .

1 p ~r,;:;j .

).- .-Q

'f

. ;-. -l-Q .8

. y, < _ , ,,q ;l L .2.9. a z.y 167 117 Specimen No.: 14M 40F 75F

Test Temperature: 40F

' l i - -

cn

• 112 13B Specimen No.: 12A 120F 120F Test Temperature: 80F

$- . T;.

- Specimen No.: 13C 14T 160F 13D 200F Test Temperature: 160F g

W -

' :,y -

,i 'c

. .4

.-1

- yn a:

. - t yrp n h- .

yy-M::p m

. .m

. g$ys)b.

NU ..

4  :. Yl .

h' .} .

h.

, 144 15C 150 .

M Specimen No.:

Test Temperature: 200F 250F 250F

j '

, . t-

~~b _ .

~

Figure V-27 i FRACTURE SURFACES OF FORT CALHOUN 3 CHARPY V-NOTCH IMPACT TEST SPECIMENS

! WELD METAL i Specimen No.: 352 33T 31B i Test Temperature: 80F 120F 120F

^

\

' , :2 ,,Y 5

. .s-. .

l

. . . + ,

lh s j El Specimen No.: 32E 31C 336

, Test Temperature: 160F 160F 200F i .

Q [, p  ! i 3 .

'!ge l

G fly,fy1%d). 4 t * *^ js@

$ .w .. x

a. 4 .w . .

+ , x.. w .

Specimen No.: 32U 341 312 g Test Temperature: 250F 250F 300F c N + , , m. ..

i 1 q 6

~ -

t l

Specimen No.: 32J 317 31E Test Temperature: 350F 350F 400F t

i l

l.

Figure V-28 FRACTURE SURFACES OF FORT CALHOUN CHARPY V-NOTCH IMPACT TEST SPECIMENS HEAT-AFFECTED-ZONE L 1 45U 42U Specimen No.: 45L 40F 40F Test Temperature: 0F 42Y 452

$ Specimen No.: 464 120F 1 Test Temperature: 80F 80F 4

~

t 43P 463 418

(, ,)

Specimen No.- 200f Te:t Temperature: 120F 160F

! M b

41Y 446 .

Specimen No.: 42B 300F 300F Test Temperature: 250F

VI. DATA ANALYSIS The radiation induced changes in toughness of the Fort Calhoun surveillance materials are summarized in Table VI-1. Index temperature shifts (t.T) were measured using the average curves at the 30 ft-lb level (T30), 50 ft-lb level (T50), and 35 mils lateral expansion level (T35). Upper shelf energy changes were based on the minimum impact energy corresponding to 100% shear fracture measured before and after irradiation. The unirradfated impact data were obtained frem the baseline evaluation.( )

The weld metal exhibited'the highest transition temperature shift (238*F) and decrease in upper snelf energy (34*) of all the surveillance materials consistent with its having the highest resicual copper content (Table III-4). The measured snift is consistent with the prediction based on Regulatory Guide 1.99(I7) at the measured fluence of 5.1 X 10 I8 n/cm . The measured shelf 2

energy decrease, 34%, is also closely credicted by Regulatory Guide 1.99 (38% predicted). The upper shelf energy of the irradiated surveillance weld;nent is 64 ft-lb.

The impact property changes for the base cetal and HAZ were significantly less than for the weld metal. The transition temperature shift and decrease in upper shelf energy for the base metal (70 F and 13%, respectively) are censistent with the predictions based on Regulatory Guide 1.99 (46'F and 16%, respectively). The measured values of the irradiated base metal indicate a hi;h level of toughness (eg,119 ft-lb upper shelf energy) for the limiting reactor vessel beltline plate.

Analysis of the weld heat-affected zone impact property changes is complicated by the excessive data scatter'as evidenced in Figures V-23 through V-25. The data scatter is most likely a 67 F

result of test specimen notch placement. (For the Fort Calhoun HAZ Charpy impact specimens, the notch was centered as closely as possible to the weld fusion line.(I) ASTM E 185-73, " Surveillance Tests for Nuclear Reactor Vessels," currently specifies notch root placement 1/32 inch from the weld fusion line.) Impact properties vary widely adjacent to the fusion line*. For the irradiated specimens, data scatter was further enhanced by the extent of weld metal dilution which created a gradient in copper content (high copper in the weld to ICW copper in the base metal). Specimens with their notch root nearest the weld fusion line would therefore exhibit lower toughness at a given test temperature than specimens with their notch root away from the fusion line on tne base metal side. The resultant transition temperature shift for the HAZ was, therefore, intermediate between that of the base metal and weld. (Note that the instrumented Charpy impact results, as shown in Figure C-3 of Appendix C, display comparatively little data scatter. The measured shift in the brittle transition temperature, TB , of 120 4 is in close agreement with the 104F shift obtained from the standard Charpy data for the HAZ.) The upper shelf energy after irradiation, 88 ft-lb, was maintained at the pre-irradiation level, thus ensuring a high level of toughness in the weld heat-affected zone.

post-irradiation tensile property measurements typically reflect an increase in strength and a decrease in ductility. The tensile property changes for Fort Calhoun are consistent with this behavior, as indicated by a comparison between Tables V-13 and V-14. For a given material, the magnitude of the strength increase and ductility decrease was generally the same over the range of test temperatures (70F to 550F). The weld metal exhibited the largest increase in yield and ultimate tensile strength (35% and 25%, respectively),

• Notch placement 1/32 inch from the fusion line tends to minimize data scatter in HAZ specimens.

68

consistent with the highest copper content occurring in the weld.

In contrast, base metal and HAZ strength property changes were 50 to 60% less than for the weld metal. The resultant post-irradiation room temperature yield strengths ranged from 78,000 psi for the base metal and HAZ to 106,000 psi for the weld. Reductions in ductility of the irradiated surveillance materials were relatively small; the total elongation after irradiation was typically 20%

or better.

The radiation exposure for the surveillance materials from the 225* capsule was determined to be 5.1 X 10 I8 n/cm2 based on analysis of the neutron threshold detectors. This contrasts with the original target fluence of 1.8 X 10 18 n/cm for the 2.63 EFPY (effective full power year) exposure of the capsule. The fluence measurements were corroborated by the analysis of the standard reference material data (Figure V-6), and by the agreement between Regulatory Guide 1.99(17) Dredictions and measured shifts and fluence for the base metal and weld metal. The neasured fluence for the 225' capsule, 5.1 X 10 18 n/cm2 , was therefore employed in subsequent analyses.

Figure VI-l was developed to provide a means of predicting trans-ition temperature shift of the controlling beltline material to adjust the Fort Calhoun reactor coolant system pressure-temperature operating limit curves. The figure is based en the upper bound shift curve from Regulatory Guide 1.99, Revision 1(I ) using the

• measured value of transition temperature shift for the weld metal and the calculated neutron fluence. The shift in the 30 ft-lb index temperature for the weld metal was used since it provided the most accurate measure of the transition temperature shif t.

This approach has been used previouslyfIO) when the proximity of

~

the irradiated 50 ft-lb level to the upper shelf energy (64 ft-lb) causes the 50 ft-lb shift to be exaggerated. The accuracy of the 30 ft-lb shift value (238F) is also supported by its conservatism relative to the shift in the 35 mils lateral expansion index I

69

temperature (229F) and the brittle transition temperature (187F) from the instrumented Charpy impact results (Appendix C).

Predicted transition temperature shift in Figure VI-l is presented as a function of the maximum neutron fluence at the inside surface of the reactor vessel. Both the shift at the vessel inside surface (Vessel ID) and at the quarter thickness (1/4t) position in the vessel wall can be determined from this figure.

The 1/4t curve was derived by reducing the vessel ID fluence by a factor of 38% to account for the attenuation of neutrons through the thickness of the vessel wall.

The predicted shift for the weld metal at cnd-of-life is 340F at I9 2 the 1/4t location based on a surface fluence of 4.2 X 10 n/cm and 32 EFPY. The correspondin end-of-life shelf energy predicted using Regulatory Guide 1.99(I7 is in excess of 50 ft-lb. These predicted values of transition temperature shift and shelf energy decrease will be reviewed as subsequent post-irradiation evaluations of Fort Calhoun surveillance capsules beccme available.

I i

l 70

TABLE VI-1

SUMMARY

OF TOUGlillESS PROPERTY CilANG p CAlll00NSURVEILLANCENATERIALS(550F,5.1x10{gFORFORT n/cm IRRADIATION)

Upper Shelf Shelf Energy T30( F) AT30( F) T50( F) AT50( F) T35( F) AT35( F) Energy (ft-lb) Change (%)

Material Base Metal 22I ") 51I ") 34(a) 137.5I ")

(longitudinal) 82 60 120 69 94 - 60 119 13 Weld Metal -28 Id} 4(a) _jg(a) 97,g(a) 210 238 '262 258 214 229 64 34 llAZ -76("} -28")I -51I ") 82I "}

28 104 89 117 63 114 88 0

- SRM 27 I8) 54(a) 51(a) 128I ")

(longitudinal) 151 124 190 136 181 130 102 21 a - unirradiated values t

o 4

W

t 500 l I I I l l l

! 400 --

1 300 _

FollT CALilOUN _

SUHVEILLANCE WEI.D 200 -

VESSEL ID -

i L' E

g i 1/41

. m D

O z

100 90 _

80 -

70 -

60 _

50 l I I I l l l 1018 2 4 6 8 10 19 2 4 6 NEUTRON FLUENCE, N/CM2 (E > 1 MEV)

FIGURE VI-1 PREDICT ED NDTT SillFT FOR Tile FOllT CALilOUN llEACTOR VESSEL BELTLINE O

VII REFERENCES

1. "Recomended Program for Irradiation Surveillance of the Fort Calhoun Reactor Vessel Materials," Combustion Engineering, Inc. , February 25, 1969, transmitted by letter CE-750-10ll, March 26,1969.

2. "Cmaha Public Power District, Fort Calhoun Station Unit No.

1, Evaluation of Baseline Specimens, Reactor Vessel Materials Irradiation Surveillance Program," TR-0-MCD-001, March 11, 1977.

3. A. G. Schoenbrunn, "NRC Questionaire on Reactor Vessel Materials," Combustion Engineering Letter CE-18074-357, August 18, 1977.

4. SAND Users Manual, AFWL-TR 67-41, September 1967.

5. ANISN Users Manual, K-1693, March 1967.

6. W. J. Stelzman and R. G. Bergren, " Radiation Strengthening and Embrittlement in Heavy Section Steel Plates and Welds,"

ORNL-4871, June 1973.

7. J. R. Hawthorne, " Post-Irradiation Dynamic Tear and Charpy 'I Perfomar.ce of 12-in. Thick A5338-1 Steel Plates and Weld Metal, " Nuclear Engineering and Design, 17 (1971), pp. 116-130.

i l

j S. R. A. Wullaert and J. W. Sheckherd, " Evaluation of the l First Maine Yankee Accelerated Surveillance Capsule, Dynatup Technical Report CR 75-317, Effects, Technology, Inc. , Santa l

l Barbara, California, August 15, 1975.

l l

73 l

l

9. A. L. Lowe, et. al., " Analysis of Caosule OCI-F from Duke Power Co. , Oconee Unit 1 Reactor Vessel Material Surveillance Program, "BAW-1421, Babcock & Wilcox, Lynchburg, Va., August 1975.

10. J. S. Perrin, et. al., " Point Beach Nuclear Plant Unit No. 2 Pressure Vessel Surveillance Program Evaluation of Capsule V," June 10, 1975.

11. J. S. Perrin, et. al., "Surry Unit No. 1 Pressure Vessel Irradiation Capsule Program: Examination and Analysis of Capsule T," June 24, 1975.

12. E. B. Norris, " Reactor Vessel Material Surveillance Program for Turkey Point Unit No. 4, Analysis of Capsule T," SWRI Project No. 02-4221, June 14, 1976.

13. A. L. Lowe, et. al, " Analysis of Capsule OCI-E, Duke Power Co. Oconee Nuclear Station Unit 1 - Reactor Vessel Materials Surveillance Program," BAW-1436, September 1977.

14. A. L. Lowe, et. al, " Analysis of Capsule OCII-6, Duke Power Co, Oconee Nuclear Station Unit 2 - Reactor Vessel Materials Surveillance Program," BAW-1437, May 1977.

15. A. L. Lowe, et. al., " Analysis of Capsule TMI-lE, Metropolitan Edison Co., Three Mile Island Nuclear Station Unit 1 Reactor Vessel Materials Surveillance Program, " BAW-1439, Januar-1977.

16. A. L. Lowe, et. al, " Analysis of Capsule ANI-E, Arkansas Power & Light Co. , Arkansas Nuclear Unit 1 - Reactor Vessel Materials Surveillance Program, "BAW-1440, April 1977.

74

i

17. Regulatory Guide 1.99, Revisien 1, " Effects of Residual Elements on Predicted Radiation Damage to Reactor Vessel Materials," April 1977.

18. S. E. Yanichko and S. L. Anderson, " Analysis of Capsule S from the Wisconsin Electric Power Company and Wiscensin Michigan Power Company Point Beach Nuclear Plant Unit No.1 Reactor Vessel Radiation Surveillance Program," WCAP-8739, November 1976.

i i

j I.

i j

(

75

~ _ . , _ . _ . _ . . . - . . . . , . _ -.

APPENDIX A TENSILE TESTS - DESCRIPTION AND EQUIPMENT The tensile tests were performed using a Riehle universal screw testing machine with a maximum capacity of 30,000 lb and separate scale ranges between 50 lb and 30,000 lb. The machine, shown in Figure A-1, is capable of constant cross head rate or constant strain rate operation. The. tensile testing was covered by the certificate of calibration which is included at the end of the Appendix A.

Elevated temperature tests were performed in a 2-1/2" ID x 18" long high temperature tensile testing furnace with a temperature limit of 1800F. A RiePle high temperature, dual range extensometer was used for monitoring specimen elongation.

The tensile specimen is depicted in Figure A-2. Figures A-3 through A-5 are isanetric drawings showing the orientation and location of the tensile specimens in the base metal, weld metal and heat-affected-zone, respectively.

Tensile testing was conducted in accordance with ASTM Method E 8-77, " Tension Tests of Metallic Materials" and/or Recommended Practice' E 21-70, "Short-Time Elevated Temperature Tension Tests of Materials," except as modified by Section 6.1 of Recommended Practice E 184-62, " Effects of High-Energy l

Radiation on the Mechanical Properties of Metallic Materials." Implementation of the ASTM Test Methods to the testing of irradiated tensile specimens is described in C-E Laboratory Procedure 00000-MCM-041, Revision 0, " Procedure l

for Tension Testing of Irradiated Metallic Materials," August 16, 1978.

l l

l l

I i

A -

l l

l l l

l . . .

.n

> l u ,

2

\

f a  ? c. -

E lff .

~

l LE$ -

3 m

• T, l

l i

i FIGURE A-1 TENSILE TEST SYSTEM WITH CONTROL CONSOLE AND ELEVATED TEMPERATURE TESTING EQUIPMENT l

A-2 d Lil i L i

/ d 1.000" g ;;i s

/ >

h - 14 NC 2 Thread N 0.250'oia om

. 1e ,

3.00" FIGURE A-2 TYPICAL TENSILE SPECIMEN l i

! A-3 e

i

~ ' ' --- _ . _ _ . _ _ ,

• ~-"'e w ,w __ ' - - - " ' " _m_ ___

~

5" =

---

1 l h n 1

1:t <- -

- p

- - ~- ,-

^^

u

/

~

l

~- d I.- Transverse

- t Longitudinal f- d. -

d--. . .. h,

/ / / _./

/

--g /

s y ,t i;

/ y n

/

Principal Rolling Direction +

-- _ --- _ls>j /

l

\

l I t= Plate Thickness

[I L -

t b_--_ __ !s '

FIGURE A-3 LOCATI0il 0F TENSILE SPECIMElls WITHIfl BASE METAL TEST MATERIAL A-4

Weld Metal 5ii _

7 A' J ID Side Aw'

n. y

~, .-

,r j

11/4"

/$[J0 t

, ,y

/, .

l 5

l l -

l!,/ '

.)

lllks'

'M ,

,/ '

l ug' f ,, / 11/4"

' 995W, ' , .. ,  ; a

/

MQ- '

'0D Side n

yy. .,,Y,,'/_ ,.

a j, y 88EE'l/s /

WW gg j ' ,-

1

';/; '

Principal Rolling Direction =

t = Plate Thickness FIGURE A-4 LOCATION OF TENSILE SPECIMENS WITHIN WELD METAL TEST MATERIAL A-5 l

l l

5" 4

ID Side s ,

[ Weld Metal

/ /

/ /

,VJ' {

HAZ x , 3 "

D I I

1/4 t Base Metals  !

'I '

/

/

/  :/c

\ ff }

/

,/

/

l5 l.

,, .I l

'I t e -- 4 / i I

l'W3 / ' I l M5f //$ -

/ f?dl ,

OD Side

/ /

Principal Rolling Direction--+-

[

l t = Plate Thickness l__________]l p _ _ __ _ _,'E sib 5"__ _J .

FIGURE A-5 LOCATION OF TENSILE SPECIMENS WITHIN HEAT-AFFECTED-ZONE TEST MATERIAL A-6

s. ui, n

'!O00

!  !.i Wilson Instrument Division gieute-

' ~ ~ ~ *

• d .[ w ist.i.tuntu r x.umt. umuume ..- l

%Y h  %;.

m,

. 4&f.'3EMds n h - c ..o

. :,*,..wk.

AN a A, [ .

k7i g c y g pr.,L~

,W a q*'. $Q

,,; jgplf.n'$(d.

9 , , n gg 1 :4w;f.[ .yg7g,gQ{Q$;{ c,.Q:M.

. ftl.4.x_ l hwanc. sums.wm.+=- ~ ~ u ~ w .; .-

FIGURE B-1 CHARPY IMPACT TEST SYSTEM, ASSOCIATED CONSTANT TEMPERATURE BATHS AND INSTRUMENTED CHARPY IMPACT DATA PROCESSING EQUIPMENT l D**]D

.w a m o JBU 2U.\.IN o

]D03[]$'

l B-4 1,-~..-,...-.-,.._....._.,__,_

U 45 A

A .315" 0.010 7 i Radius 0.394" 2.165" 0.394"s FIGURE'B-2 TYPICAL CHARPY V-NOTCH IMPACT SPECIMEN B-5

1 5" l II i 1

" ~

r L :t <r . -

A"

/

~#

, ( _

p

,.s g__ _ _ _

Transverse e

_, f J - '/ t '

Longitudinal g' ) p

/

1L

/ 5

,-f'I/

- ,- i

,/ > -- ,f

/ /

m g _ _ _ _ _j)I I l' / Principal Rolling Direction +

l l ll t= Plate Thickness l1 J

l l

FIGURE B-3 LOCATI0fl 0F CHARPY IMPACT SPECIMENS WITHI?t l

' BASE METAL TEST MATERIAL l

B-6 l

W

= 5" "

f eld Metal r eld Side AF'

_/ f }

l 1/4"

./ f,

/

/ ,

/ / .

/ /

/: // t

'W /

Wy

/

W / /:~ 3 f MJ /

I 1/4" M / /w0D Side Y h'j l

l i_ _ _ __ _ _ _k l l ll Principal Rolling Direction =

l t = Plate Thickness l

l// //

N!b /

FIGURE B-4 LOCATION OF CHARPY IMPACT SPECIMENS WITHIN WELD METAL TEST MATERIAL B-7

5"

=

{ WeldID SideMetal 2 /

1. iM7 AV' ,,

l HAZ % ~7 Base Metalw I I 1/4 tl l

/ MA ,i n

/

/ / j' a

- /,,

I 'I i g=1 ,

!M3i' j/ I l ,

t

! N;h h ,

I I I I I i

/ / ih ')!

/ '

/ / y\ 0D Side +

/

/ /45EEjii!

/ /

l j Principal Rolling Direction-

i______ v t = Plate Thickness l

1 i FIGURE B-5 LOCATION OF CHARPY IMPACT SPECIMENS WITHI!!

HEAT-AFFECTED-ZONE TEST MATERIAL B-8

I l

' ';'% DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY

.#, d ARmT MATERI ALS AND MECH AHtc5 RESEARCH CEf4TER WATERTOWN. M ASS ACH USETTS o21Ta Mr. Stenton/bh:/(617)'J23-3231

\.{,Ma [- f,N

%QE DR W -MQ 20 April 1978 i.

Combustion En;;ineering, Incorporated ATTN: Mr. Ray Hurlburt 1000 Prospect Hill Road Windsor, CT 06095

Dear Mr. Hurlbut:

A set of Charpy specimens broken en the 210 ft-lb capacity Satee nachine has been received for evaluation along with the completed

questionnaire. Machine Serial Sc. 1366 The results of the ' tests indicate the cachine to be prcducing acceptable energy values at all three energy levels (see inclosed table).

This cachine satisfies the prcof- est requirements of ASTM Standard E-23.

- If inis machine is moved or undergoes any majcr repairs or adjustmen:s, ::.is certification 'oeccees invalia and the nachine must i:e rechecked. Recoesi of the penculum, replace ent of anvils or adjusting the hei;nt of d:cp 2re examples of such major repairs or adjustments. It should be no:ed tha: ti

.a specimen recuires ever 50', of the nachine capacity :o fracture :he nachine should be checked to assure that the pendulum is str_ight, the any:Is or striker have not been damaged and that all bolts are still tight. Tnis certificatien is valid for ene year frem the da:e ci :he test.

Sincerely, n

_L&L&: d, eMn n..

1 Inc1 PAUL N. ECLSTON Table Chief Quality Engineering F. ranch XMR For: IFI.- 2 1 Sept 77 B-9

. e O

COMGUSTilN ENGINEERING,INC.

Nucles Laboratones INSTRUMENT CALIBR ATION REQUIREMENT SHEET DATE: 10/2C/78 EQUIPMENT Dicital Thermocouple Thermometer AREA Rm 235-5 EL-9G

~

INSTRUMENT READABILITY CALIBRATION CHECKED MIN FUNCTION TYPE RANGE READABILITY ACCURACY FREQUENCY BY Thermomet er Digital -313 F 11F i1F 3 mos.

to

+752 F A

PREPARED BY th'# At /!'!./ l.a .

APPROVED BY Q . / . /3h

% AFF?.OVED BY

'h./ f'-l

/ /'

B-10 cc ocoom isosi

• COMGUSTION ENGINFLR:f1G,INC.

Nucl. .ir Laboratorias INSTRUfEfJT CAllilRATIUG ILLUUlHEMEflT CHEET DATE: I-IY-79 EQUIPMENT lloneywell Temperature Recorder EL-78 AREA Rm 235-5 INSTRUMENT READABILITY CAllBRATION CHECKED FUflCTIOff TYPE RANGE 'REA hlLITY ACCURACY FRECUENCY sy Tecperaturo 6 point -350 F 1F -

+1F 3 N*

Pocorder to

+250 F O

'i l

PREPARED BY / h %c>< /[M/,7q APPROVED BY

$.7 ,Le I APPROVCD BY M4 ,

J /<

B-11 cc covoivs is.rsi

.~ _. . _ - _ , -- - - - ,

o COMRUOTION EPlGINEERING, l^d C.

Nucle.it Lalwwatorms INSTRUMENT CALluRATION REQUIREMENT SHEET DATE: 1-17-79 EQUIPMENT Honeywell Temperature Controller EL-120 AREA Rm 235-5 INSTRUMENT READABILITY CALIBRATION CHECKED i MIN FUNCTION TYPE RANGE READABILITY ACCURACY FREQUENCY BY Tec:peratur's Dial -350 F 1F +1F 3 mcf -

Contzul to

+250 F PREPARED BY '" M / tt APPROVED GY *I b APPROVED BY ~

1. M - i f/

B-12

,r - .. ....,.

APPENDIX C INSTRUMENTED CHARPY V-NOTCH DATA ANALYSIS ,7 All baseline and irradiated Charpy impact tests in this program were perhermed .

on an instrumented test system. Instrumented impact testing provides more quantitative data from a Charpy specimen which enable a more detailed  ;

analysis of the surveillance material toughness behavior.

Photographs of the oscilloscope traces of load and energy versus time were taken for each test of the base plate, weld, heat-affected-zone, and standard reference material. From each trace, the general yield load (PGY), maximum load (PM), and fracture load were determined, as shown in Tables C-1 through C-4 For each material, the loads were plotted against the corresponding test temperature to generate the irradiated load / temperature diagrams.

To demonstrate the effects of neutron irradiation on each material, both baseline and post-irradiation load / temperature results were plotted to-gether. These plots are shown in Figures C-1 to C-4.

Three index temperatures are of interest. T g the brittle transition temperature, corresponds to the onset of ductile fracture; belcw TB the fracture is completely brittle. 7 , the 3

ductility transitic:, temperature, corresponds to the mid-transition region where the fracture has become predominantly ductile. TD, the ductility temperature, corresponds to the onset of the upper shelf energy wnere fracture is completely ductile.

The radiation-induced toughness property changes of the surveillance materials are summarized in Table C-5. Standard Charpy impact data are included with the instrumented data since each method represents a unique l

l material property. The standard Charpy test provides a bulk measurement of the energy to initiate and propagate a crack through to failure of the material. In contrast, analysis of the instrumented data enables characterization l

of the components of the dynamic load behavior prior to material failure.

The snift in the brittle transition temperature, T , Band the ductility l

C-1 k

transition temoerature, Tg , are comparable to the shift in the 30 ft-lb Charpy index temperature, Cv 30 The radiation induced changes in the instrumented data therefore tend to corroborate the changes detemined from the standard Charpy impact data.

The value of the instrumented results was especially evident in the case of the HAZ. The HAZ impact energy. data (Figure V-23) exhibited considerable t

scatter, making it difficult to establish index temperatures. In contrast, the instrumented dna (Figure C-3) were relatively consistent, despite the previously cited situation with notch placement (see Section VI). The capability to focus on the crack initiation event usi_ng the instrumented analysis thus provided a means of quantitatively establishing the radiation

• induced shift in the HAZ which would otherwise be masked using the bulk measurement approach of the shift in the total impact energy.

The third parameter obtainable from the instrumented data isDT , the ductility temperature, which is givei in Table C-5. T0 corresponds closely with the onset of the upper shelf energy (minimum temperature for the material to exhibit 100% shear fraci.ure). The agreement is seen to hold for both the unirradiated and irradiated data.

The instrumented Charpy analysis substantiates the results from the standard impact tests. In particular, this approach provides a more quantitative means of measuring radiation induced property changes by analysis of the entire load record rather than using the sir.gle (bulk) measurement of impact energy. As more experience is gained with this technique, it offers the potential of providing a more quantitative measurement of toughness property changes than is possible with current impact testing.

C-2

TABLE C-1 INSTRUMENTED CHARPY IMPACT TEST, FORT CALHOUN IRRADIATED BASEliETAL(LONGITUDINAL)

?

Test Fast Fracture Specimen Temperature Yield Load, Maximum Load, Lead, Identification ('F) PGY (lb) PM (Ib) PF (lb) 167 40 3400 3600 --

14M 40 3300 3500 --

117 75 3400 3900 --

12A 80 3100 3800 --

112 120 3000 4100 3900 138 120 3200 4200 3900 147 160 2800 3900 --

13C 160 3000 4000 3600 130 200 2900 4000 3500 144 200 3000 4200 --

15C 250 2900 3900 --

15D 250 --

No Record --

i-C-3

TABLE C-2 INSTPUMENTED CHARPY IMPACT TEST, FORT CALHOUN IRRADIATED

~

WELD METAL f

Test Fast Fracture Specimen Temperature Yield Load, Maximum Load, Load, Identification ('F) PGY (lb) PM (Ib) PF (1b) 352 80 3900 4000 --

. 318 120 3500 4000 --

, 33T 120 3400 3900 --

32E 160 3300 3600 --

. 31C 160 3300 3800 - --

336 200 3350 4000 --

32U 250 3100 3700 --

341 250 3200 3800 3600 312 300 3050 3900 3400 317 350 3000 3800 --

32J 350' 3000 3900 --

31E 400 3000 3700 --

C-4

s i

J

.1 TABLE C-3 INSTRUMENTED CHARPY IMPACT ,

TEST, FORT CALHOUN IRRADIATED HEAT-AFFECTED ZONE Test Fast Fracture

• Specimen Temperature Yield Load, Maximum Load, Load,

' Identification (*F) PGY-(lb) 'PM (lb) PF (lb) l 45L 0 3600 3900 --

! 420 40 3400- 4200 4100 45U 40 --

No Record --

464 80 3300 4200 --

42Y 80 3400 4200 3900 452 120 3100 3800 3700 4 43P 120 3300 4300 2700 463 160 3000 4100 4000 41B 200 3100 4300 --

42B 250 -3000 4100 --

41Y 300 2900 3900 -

446 300 2900 4100 --

i a

i l

l i- C-5 l

TABLE C-4 INSTRUMENTED CHARPY IMPACT TEST, FORT CALHOUN IRRADIATED STANDARD REFERENCE MATERIAL (SRM)

Test Fast Fracture Specimen Temperature Yield Load, Maximum Load, Load, Identification (*F) PGY (Ib) PM (lb) PF (lb) 55T 80 3300 3300 --

573 120 3100 3600 --

566 120 3100 3800 --

55M 160 3100 4100 --

55Y 160 3100 4100 --

o -

56J 200 3000 4000 --

563 200 3000 4300 --

565 250 3000 4000 3500 56A 250 3000 4000 4000 56D 300 2900 3900 --

SSP 350 2800 4000 --

575 350 2800 4100 --

C-6

TABLE C-5 TOUGitNESS PROPERTY CllANGES BASED ON INS 1RUMENTED CilARPY IM 'ACT TEST Ma terial Tg (*F) ATB ( F) TN ( F) ATN ( f) ACv30( f) ACv 50 TD I I} 100 bear ract F)

Base Metal (RW) unirrad -22 --

52 -- -- --

120 160

-irrad 30 52 90 38 60 69 200 200 Weld Metal unirrad -112 --

-30 -- -- --

80 80

irrad 75 187 180 210 238 258 340 350

?

w ilAZ unirrad! -140 --

-40 -- -- --

160 160

.irrad -20 120 40 80 104 117 270 250 SRM unirrad -50 --' 60 -- -- --

160 200 irrad 80 130 190 130 124 136 315 350

98 C

w

& Q

<w m<

5

-. c. c. 3. _

l I i i I

aeO I

I e E

~

A a

b o

=

h I e 1 n / e o

e / u I <

/ =

l l

/ 6>

l /

De f O a / -

! 5

/ I Y*

/ / d e 3

l l 5 e '

n a y ,JI -

Q$$e t 1 -

/ z f 2 i ,

/

/ 3h -

m e oV a E /

• W m o T j u a

//

I

! h

/

I R

• E s"

1. 5

( / a -

i / *

\ /

\ / e 5

- \ / 2 _ a 2

\ / 2

\ N,/ '

5 w

Z N

N

- N -

S T l s -

a N 9 N 5

\ c I I sI l I

e e e e e S, . 8, 8 e 8.

m 8

~

S87 'GVO1 C-3

a

. i ,

9. m~ s- a

- o . -

g l -

e E ~Sm a H

w 2

~go u. C O a z m , g

• e 3:

$ vi W

n &

es e / -S 5

a 2

5 f

l / / '

~h U e

f e l 3 ~ 5 e(mI

~

i i n -

/ -

-8 -

& j, .

/ / A c

/ / l c

/ <

/

/ / 3 3

/ / / 5

/ E

_ \

',/

\ /

/

t s

- o a

=

/ e c z w .a MO Q E

<w / / -

o =

3H /

=

<5 / 3 f  ! E 5@>.

=- \ /

20 02w

==saa \ g g/ -

g 1 '

u a

I 000 /'s e 5

l t i e t e ,?

o -

,S 3 m

3 m

3 n

5

~

SS7 'GVO7 C-9

0 9 l l I g l

=

n a- N F-E

_ _ g n w 2

C N

Q

-e f

/ 8 I I t

/ <

80 E / -

/ w I

I

/

/ / l//  :

g w

I 4 40 E4 /C -

$P E n I / / w

~

g I / / =

A i / / 3 w=

EE I -

E f / j

/ / /

• 2 w

/ / / s I 4

/ / - I gg*

/ / / w a

/ / * <

/

/ 3 lI

\l

/

I

+

=-

• E

\l

' =

A O

/

I c c

\ l  %, -

8 2 I / <C z l / + W I I E6 2 O i / o ~

- I / E5 3 o- 3 A I ~ '

E j ,/ 5 23 u-3r

/ '/ l 590

// l $ 3 l

1 /

(/ 9 a

l l l l g e e e g e e 3, 8 8

n a

n S

n 8

n S S 1 'O':f0 1 l

C-10 l

l

8 m

i es e i g i n j n -

A o =

s w E

2.

I w u

z s" e m -y

% e o I -

g o

- i N C I

~ 5

=

l I m

- e, . ,I s% ,l z- g ?w- n

- = 3

• i 3 -

~ \ N x / swO I

J,- -

se5

- 2 -

1 p/ l a <

l 5

'p s'

/ m S e /'m'N / -

3 $

/ 0

/ / n I 1

l /

/ l +

" ~

l / -

I e

=

=

=

/  ! ,

a l./

7 / o

+

O U \ / +

H c - ee z

<w \ / d N d 3

< *$ N /

5C \

/

o R

E g

\ "

=

5E2 5 > 2 =' \ / - o E l 1 meo \ /

l 1 \ / v*

l \ / = =

\/

v 7

?

I Vi f I ,$

E 8 $ $ E

$+ e 8 n N SS1 'GVO7 C-li

Enclostre (2) to CE-18074-891 1 Tabulation of Changes in Surveillance Revi_sion

• Revision Capsule Report TR-0-MCM-001 0 1 Pg. 1 Sumary 18 2 18 2 Max. fluence on inside surface 4.5x10 n/cm 3.4x10 n/cm I

Pg. 2 Reference to operating limit curves included deleted Pg. 32 Flux at clad / vessel interface relative to flux at capsule .87 .67 Flux at 1/4 t relative to flux at capsule .47 .41 10 2 10 2 Pg. 34 Flux at vessel / clad interface 5.5x10 n/cm -sec 4.2x10 n/cm -sec 10 2 10 2 Flux at 1/4 thickness of vessel 2.9x10 n/cm -sec 2.6x10 n/cm -sec Fluence at Vessel / Clad Interface 18 18 2 EOC-3 (2.6 EFPY) 4.5x10 n/cm 3.4x10 n/cm ,

18 2 18 2 E0C-5 (4.3 EFPY) 7.4x10 n/cm 5.6x10 n/cm I9 2 I9 2 E0L (32 EFPY) 5.5x10 n/cm 4.2x10 n/cm Fluence at 1/4 Thickness 18 2 18 2 E0C-3 2.4x10 n/cm 2.1x10 n/cm 18 3.5x10 18 n/cm 2 2 E0C-5 3.9x10 n/cm I9 2 I9 2 EOL 2.9x10 n/cm 2.6x10 n/cm 10 2 10 2 Pg. 35 Max flux in vessel 5.5x10 n/cm -sec 4.2x10 n/cm -sec l9 2 I9 2 End of life fluence 5.5x10 n/cm 4.2x10 n/cm .

18 2 18 2 Max fluence E0C-5 7.4x10 n/cm 5.6x10 n/cm Fluences are higher than original design est. by a factor of 2.75 2.10 I9 2 I9 2 E0L fluence 5.5x10 ,n/cm 4.2x10 n/cm I9 2 I9 2 Design estimate fluence 2.0x10 a/cm 2.0x10 n/cm Pg. 70 Predicted shift for weld metal at 0 0 E0L at 1/4t 350 F 340 F I9 2 I9 2 based on a surface fluence of 5.5x10 n/cm 4.2x10 n/cm Pg. 72 NDTT shift vs neutron fluence (Cu.ve) (Changed 1/4t curve location)

Pgs. 73-83 Pressure temperature limitation curves Included Deleted Pgs. 84, 85, 86 References Included Changed to pgs. 73,74, 75